Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron?

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by Data_Junkie on Thursday January 17, 2019 @01:27AM (#18928809)

Yeah, that's not true. They have said that Qt4 widgets are feature finished, and not being deprecated. Obviously eventually there will be little use of the older way, but they have repeatedly said they are not deprecating them. Believe what you want.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by Memosyne on Thursday January 17, 2019 @09:07AM (#18930815)

I'm aware that they aren't being deprecated, but that doesn't mean they aren't being phased out. When I say it is being "phased-out" I'm referring to how it will no longer be advertised as the optimal solution to a problem. Perhaps we're just arguing semantics at this point?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by Data_Junkie on Thursday January 17, 2019 @02:12PM (#18933584)

You can use the tool until it's deprecated. Everything is constantly being "phased out".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by iqy on Thursday January 17, 2019 @09:21AM (#18930916)

Phasing out is the same as sunsetting, i.e., terminating: https://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/sunsetting

From the first post, I assumed the commenter meant something like, "in Qt 6 QWidgets will stop working", which is insane.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Should Qt be considered in the place of electron? by Memosyne on Thursday January 17, 2019 @09:34AM (#18931000)

I guess it was poor wording on my part then, sorry. I only meant that it was not going to be the focus of the product anymore.

[ Parent | on HN ]