On vrijdag 12 oktober 2018 15:57:35 CEST Mathias Hasselmann wrote: > Hi Boudewijn, > > these kind of refactorings are neccessary to keep code maintainable I fear.
Well... If code stops building from Qt 5 to another Qt 5, that means that thousands of projects have to change their code. Thousands of projects have to struggle. Is that really worth it? I always thought Qt came with a firm promise not to break source compatibility except in new, major releases. > Anyway, it seems like you are maintaining a bunch of custom patches on > top of Qt? How about reducing your maintainance burden by upstreaming > them? Qt would benefit from bugfixes and new features. You would benefit > from reduced workload and responsiblity? This sounds like win-win to me, > do you agree? Apart from one patch that disables wintab support because we've got our own, those patches pretty much all come from Qt's bug tracker. We did try to upstream the one big patch that made the opengl painter engine work again on macOS, and that happened in the end. -- https://www.krita.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
