* Qt is a pure joy to work with compared to every other cross platform widget toolkit out there.
Over the years, I've worked with gtk 2, gtk 3, Tk, wxWidgets, SWT along with proprietary toolkits like MFC and Cocoa. Qt stands above them all in terms of ease of use and quality of output(among the cross platform).
Putting the LTS as your first bullet makes no sense to me. Developers are not cheap. Qt does not owe companies the engineering resources to support and maintain an LTS product. All of their code is still open source and development in the open, working with their community. (I've personally found the paid developers very responsive to issues I've raised.) So if Companies aren't paying for Qt, who should? If that minor change helps keep Qt alive, I'm all for it.
* Qt is a pure joy to work with compared to every other cross platform widget toolkit out there.
Over the years, I've worked with gtk 2, gtk 3, Tk, wxWidgets, SWT along with proprietary toolkits like MFC and Cocoa. Qt stands above them all in terms of ease of use and quality of output(among the cross platform).
Putting the LTS as your first bullet makes no sense to me. Developers are not cheap. Qt does not owe companies the engineering resources to support and maintain an LTS product. All of their code is still open source and development in the open, working with their community. (I've personally found the paid developers very responsive to issues I've raised.) So if Companies aren't paying for Qt, who should? If that minor change helps keep Qt alive, I'm all for it.