Re: [Development] Proposal to raise the minimum CMake version needed to build and use Qt 6.9

[Alexandru Croitor via Development]

> On 13. Nov 2024, at 16:01, Alexandru Croitor <alexandru.croi...@qt.io> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 13. Nov 2024, at 15:38, Sune Vuorela <nos...@vuorela.dk> wrote:
>> 
>> On 2024-11-13, Alexandru Croitor via Development 
>> <development@qt-project.org> wrote:
>>> Which debian stable version are you using?
>> 
>> Debian stable is debian 12. It ships with 3.25.
>> 
>>> Is it unreasonable to ask to install cmake from one of those official repos?
>> 
>> Backports are not part of stable, so yes, I would consider that is 
>> unreasonable.
> 
> Do you consider it unreasonable due to backports being 'backports', so not 
> 'stable', thus you are completely against installing any software from there? 
> 
> Or is it more specific that you think that the backports-provided cmake will 
> not be stable enough for building software?
> 
> CMake is generally very good in regards to compatibility and building older 
> and newer projects. 
> 
> While I can relate to the 'only-use-stable' sentiment, I think it's somewhat 
> too harsh of a requirement in this case.
> 
> Enforcing a lower cmake version requirement just for development work, when 
> the specific debian versions will not be used for
> building / shipping / packaging Qt 6.9 for the larger open source community, 
> seems a bit of an uneven trade-off.
> 
> Especially when it's easy to just install a specific standalone 
> kitware-provided cmake binary into a custom location, and use
> that only for specific projects.

I will also point out that we likely won't be raising the cmake version in the 
coming years after this.

At the same time, debian 13 will release sometime mid-2025? with a newer cmake 
version.

So maybe half a year of using a non-stable easily-acquirable cmake for 
development work isn't too much to ask?
-- 
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development