On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 12:57 AM Kevin Kofler <kevin.kof...@chello.at> wrote:
> IMHO, major versions with source&binary compatibility need to actually > live > much LONGER, not shorter. At least 20-30 years, with the time at least > doubling with every new major release. Or just stop doing compatibility > breaks entirely. > This isn't possible by any practical measure. Unless the API design was so good that it encompassed every possible case and it was designed in such a way that nothing changes, then it could live forever (and yes 20 years is forever). Since the API need to get fixed, polished, refactored and improved, compatibility needs to break from time to time. Keeping compatibility is simply not maintainable and honestly a chimera. Can we drop that topic branch now? Shorter binary-incompatibility cycles, no matter whether you call them > major > versions or start breaking binary compatibility in minor versions (ewww!) > are going to make Qt entirely unmanageable for distributions. Somewhat harder. Entirely unmanageable is an unjustified exaggeration. > We already > have to maintain Qt 3, 4, 5, and soon 6. > Actually we have to maintain 5, we should've moved away from 4 (and I personally know that can be a pain for some codebases), and honestly if you're using (and requiring) Qt3 then you really need to rethink your approach.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
