For Shame
-
So, the new QT SDK 1.1 came out and I got all excited, the way I always do for a new release. I went to run the examples and the first two that I chose to run failed. I consider it a big problem when things like this happen. Qt is in a transitional period in its architecture and needs to create a comfortable experience for new comers. Yet, they can't even get their own demo applications to run without failing on a standard default install. So much progress has been made since the shakeup, and I want to congratulate the developers for their efforts on that. However, the silly mistakes have to stop. I won't be filing a bug report, so don't bother asking me to do that. The purpose of this note is to shame the developers into meeting the very basic standards for a major release.
-
Would you at least say which two examples have failed? :)
-
[quote author="Duff" date="1305062080"]So, the new QT SDK 1.1 came out and I got all excited, the way I always do for a new release. I went to run the examples and the first two that I chose to run failed. I consider it a big problem when things like this happen. Qt is in a transitional period in its architecture and needs to create a comfortable experience for new comers. Yet, they can't even get their own demo applications to run without failing on a standard default install. So much progress has been made since the shakeup, and I want to congratulate the developers for their efforts on that. However, the silly mistakes have to stop. I won't be filing a bug report, so don't bother asking me to do that. The purpose of this note is to shame the developers into meeting the very basic standards for a major release.[/quote]
I think it is a shame to complain without giving anyone a fair change to verify and help overcome the problems you encountered.
Why complain in the first place if you are not interested in getting it fixed? -
Nope, I insist on being a douche about this! Keep the criticism coming if you like. There are not so many demos that the developers could not test them to make sure they are working before shipping. We are not talking about some obscure functionality here and this is not the first time this has happened. Think of it as tough love. I want the new comers, even the ones who are not C++ programmers and are just looking to play with Qt Quick, to have a chance at getting started without being stymied by thoughtless over sites.
-
You may be right to some extent but I haven't encounter bugs with examples ( yes, I have other problems but not this one ) ... which mean that the problem/bug is not with everyone => it is in you computer ( may be not only ).
I don't criticize you .. I'm just finding your point of view a little strange :)
-
Trying to "shame" the developers without being really clear about what the problem is isn't going to get the problem fixed in the future.
If you can tell us which examples are broken for you (and what actually happens when they break) someone can actually look at fixing them. As secretNinja said, it might not actually be an issue with the SDK . It might instead be something else misbehaving.
-
Duff, if you get me the details of which ones are broken I can see that they are fixed. Email me if you prefer. firstname.lastname@nokia.com.
-
@Duff: I fully agree. BTW what is the default installation environment for the SDK?
-
[quote author="Duff" date="1305066819"]Nope, I insist on being a douche about this! Keep the criticism coming if you like. There are not so many demos that the developers could not test them to make sure they are working before shipping. We are not talking about some obscure functionality here and this is not the first time this has happened. Think of it as tough love. I want the new comers, even the ones who are not C++ programmers and are just looking to play with Qt Quick, to have a chance at getting started without being stymied by thoughtless over sites. [/quote]
