Developing cross-platform desktop apps is hard. To help with this, I open sourced my build system . It lets you release (Py)Qt apps in minutes instead of months. It aims to make (Py)Qt a more viable alternative to Electron. It already has preliminary support for Qt for Python, and I want to expand it in the future.
1) went to your link -> intensive blinking, firefox reporting that it "forbade access to graphics card" for whichever reason
2) Was impressed that Windows file is only 1 MB (turns out the installer downloads a lot more than that, which is ok but could be mentioned)
3) Started the program and agreed with tutorial
4) Followed tutorial to C:\Users\myusername\Desktop
5) Followed tutorial by pressing Backspace -> program stopped working and crashed
No hate intended, but if you want people to use this, you should probably think about fixing some of the steps to be less cumbersome :).
FWIW the program looks cool.
1) No idea why that happened. I'm really not doing anything special on the web site.
2) You're right, sorry. The Windows binary is an online installer. I'll update the web site to mention that once the load is off the server.
5) Hm... Sorry about that. Would be extremely interesting to know if this happens on your computer every time. It's probably too much to ask since you already uninstalled, but if you have a few mins, can you try again?
> if you want people to use this, you should probably think about fixing some of the steps to be less cumbersome
That's literally what I spend my days working on. Desktop apps are a lot of work...
> FWIW the program looks cool.
I wanted to try a third time, but after a third reinstall, the tutorial no longer pops up. Is there a way to clear EVERYTHING away and try again as if this was a new computer?
I tried PyInstaller for some scripts a few weeks ago and it worked perfectly and easily, but I don't know if it works with Qt.
EDIT: Wait, what about BSD/MIT/etc licenses?
Why do you want to switch?
PyQT are free to extract fees from the ecosystem as long as they can, just as some open source devs are free to try to eat their lunch money.
That means not everyone has a business model that supports paying a license fee.
If only I had F10 on my keyboard ... Is it even possible to use PyQT and have features like touch bar support?
"Install PyQT and QT Framework, no not that version, no not that one? Your on Fedora? Oh okay, add this rpm repo, no the developer version"
The ability to install it through Pipenv should make this easier, right?
I don't believe pipenv really solves these issues.
If it's a GUI app, there's a good chance you can ignore the enterprisy distributions.
I try to like Qt, but this cost a bunch of confidence.
That's what you get from users when you try to be nice and don't invent your own package manager.
Do I wish everyone used their distro package manager? Yes. Do I wish there was one package manager? Yes. Do I develop with Nix myself? You bet. But I fear that this sort of quixotic battle has already been lost; frankly I don’t blame people for finding it a confusing mess.
Unless I misunderstood your comment, in which case I apologise!
This does become hairy when you try to inter-operate, but for development, at least, it seems to work quite well.
Used to use PyQt on a bunch of projects. It was a fairly decent framework. Not bad for native-looking UIs.
It's also available under the commerical license, too, so customers don't have to purchase from the Qt Company AND PyQt.
And how does this make the slightest difference for open source projects?
Exactly. So no practical difference. Just a religious one.
Also you can't include non-GPL compatible code (Apache is incompatible with GPLv2 for example).
Free is letting your users choose what to do, and just making sure you get credit for your work. You can't take ownership of code that's been permissivly licensed, you just don't have to share your contributions. Nobody could just copyright OpenBSDs code and then sue them
> A consequence is that if you choose to use GPL'd Perl modules or Java classes in your program, you must release the program in a GPL-compatible way,
https://pypi.org/project/PySide2/#description (currently empty)
In these times of web stuff, it's really nice to work with a framework that is absolutely stable. (well, except Qt5 is quite a change :-))
Because python links dynamically, I believe it's possible to use python Qt bindings commercially without a commercial Qt license. Does pyside2 support this?
If you link statically to LGPL libraries from commercial software you must provide object files (or provide link to where anyone can get them). Just as easy as providing dynamically linked library.
If browser vendors don't change course in regards to WebAssembly's roadmap, Flash and Applets are back, just give it one more year to mature the eco-system.
Can Native Qt on web assembly be accessible? How would that work cross-platform?
- Web apps (using DOM like usual)
- Native Qt and a WASM runtime that has bindings directly to the native library (basically PyQt, but WASM instead of Python)
- Qt apps in canvas (webgl)
The first two are definitely accessible (by default or very easily). The last one not so much, but it's still possible, and project like Qt should have enough resources to pull it off. The second approach should be the most performant.