Comment by rsp1984 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by rsp1984 | Hacker News Reader

Long time Qt / Creator user here (15+ years). Qt Creator used to be the best C++ IDE by a mile and it's still pretty competitive (yes, you can use it without any Qt whatsoever!), however these days I am very unexcited about new releases of it. It looks like the Qt team prioritizes ever more features (who's asking for these!?) and bloat over fixing even the most basic of bugs. It's really baffling.

The Qt Creator bug tracker [1] is bursting at the seams but nobody seems to really care. 5+ years old, very reproducible, very annoying bugs are being ignored by the 100s.

Here's an idea: can we have a feature freeze for like 1 or 2 years and only solve bugs / tech debt? There's no new feature that you could put into Qt Creator that I'd prefer over bugfixes. None.

Eike, or others from the Qt team, if you're reading this, please give it a thought. You have a fantastic IDE and it's painful seeing it degrade so much. Thank you.

[1] https://bugreports.qt.io/projects/QTCREATORBUG/issues/

Okay, this makes me think of QTBUG-56214, which has to do with Qt Creator suddenly not recognizing mouse scroll wheel events after a while. (often as a result of various device state changes common if you use a KVM on your machine)

Been following the issue for years, apparently it was marked as fixed a few months ago, but the issue is clearly still there. I wonder if this latest Qt Creator update will finally incorporate the fix, or if its not really fixed.

Hey, it's open. It can be forked.

If anyone is willing to maintain a frozen branch (preferably one of those where Designer still worked), I want to know.

Honestly the open-source community is one of the most unironically capitalist communities we have. Do devs have social responsibility? Nope, fork it. Do devs have a responsibility to take input from the people their product has locked in? Nope, fork it. Do devs have a responsibility to maintain what they produce & present? Nope, fork it.

If only forking it was a good answer, we'd have solved so many by now.

The Qt company has been somewhat hostile to the spirit of open source (see the drama around closing the Qt library for a year since release), so I'm not sure how close it is to the canonical core of the community, and especially to any obligations that might come from that.

Either way, there is no mechanism for accountability in open source other than peer pressure or reputation. Qt Company doesn't care about that a lot. They care about making buck first and foremost, operating in the "capitalist" realm. So the solution I propose is using that playbook too.

In a broader view, forking is telling people "you are not our devs any more, we're seizing the means of production", which I think is rather anti-capitalist.

They should just give up and add the features that are compelling to Code via extensions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com