The two real problems with RPM etc.
Having a mechanism resolving dependency/requirements is fairly standard among package management systems. And this is it that makes e.g. RPM packages incompatible to different distributions. This problem must be resolved, such that users are free to use software they like (and do not have to wait for their distribution to have a package) and even to allow ISV's to use the package management system (maybe also for their commercial software).
What we need is a scheme for unique requirement identifiers that work with every Linux system.
The other thing is that of standard shared library's file names. Although not the fault of the package management system itself, some libraries seem to change their name with every new release of my distribution. My prominent example is the C++ standard library. Here, we also need a more common naming sheme.
Qt is a library, and should therefore be licensed under LGPL.
Despite free software is great, it must be possible for a company to develop and sell (yes!) commercial software.
Someone using KDE and therefore having installed Qt, could no longer use proprietary software that uses Qt? Unless he/she installes a second Qt under the commercial license? That can't be the future of Linux...
Or is there a way to circumvent that?