On Friday 22 April 2005 9:26 pm, John J. Lee wrote: > "R. C. James Harlow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Friday 22 April 2005 20:07, Grant Edwards wrote: > > > I've never tried Qt. > > > > Qt, in my opinion, is as excellent as python in the consistency stakes, > > has the best documentation bar none, an excellent set of python bindings, > > the best free layout tool, and an active and helpful community. > > Qt's technical superiority is unchallenged (pretty much). > > > The killer, of course, is that there's no free windows port, so if you're > > doing free software that you want to run on linux then you're stuffed. > > Soon to change: Qt 4 for Windows (and the corresponding PyQt) will be > available under the GPL. Dunno when Qt 4 is scheduled for though. I > wonder if BlackAdder will carry on with roughly similar price and > licensing with Qt 4?
Qt 4 is scheduled for the end of Q2. The plan is that PyQt will follow "fairly soon" after, but there will be a number of releases with classes being added at each release. It will be some afterwards that the support matches that of Qt 3. > Also, somebody outside Trolltech was also doing a port of Qt 3 GPL to > Windows which apparently got quite a long way. Whether that effort > continues, and whether PyQt will support that 'unofficial' port, I > don't know (not sure TT are hugely happy about the port, so perhaps > PyQt's author - Phil Thompson - respecting the people at TT as I'm > sure he does, won't support it). With something like that you adopt a "wait and see" attitude to see if it gains any momentum. > Poor old Phil Thompson is fated to answer the same licensing questions > forever, though - an activity I suspect he dislikes even more than GUI > application programming <wink> But at least it means I can stop adding the phrase "but it depends of which platform you are using" to every sentence I utter. Phil -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
