On Wednesday 20 November 2024 01:36:07 Pacific Standard Time Manuel Bergler wrote: > > We still have the Debian stable problem, though. > > Doesn't the exact same logic apply here, though? Why upgrade Qt but not > CMake? Given that you'll only have to upgrade CMake on the dev machines, > whereas a verison of Qt that is newer than what is available by default on > your OS will need to also be deployed to all target machines and/or to > your users, this doesn't seem to make much sense to me.
Not exactly, because it's a different audience. We're talking about a developer trying to develop Qt, not someone trying to deploy an application to a system that can't be otherwise updated. Debian is an OS of choice for CIs and workstations because of its stability. I can certainly see a situation where developers are given access to a beefy server to do their development on, because developing on their Windows laptops (often encumbered with IT-required virus and IP-protection scanning) is not acceptable, and the IT admins install a stable Linux distribution to lower their maintenance costs. This is where Linux development environments differ from Windows and Mac ones: we expect people to be on the latest macOS and latest Xcode, and on Windows the developer tools are completely detached from the OS anyway. Plus, there's a question of just how recent the minimum version would be. We try not to require something too recent and CMake 3.26 is *now* only 19 months old. There are no other dependencies in Qt that have a minimum this recent. We try to give at least 2 years. And this *is* the latest stable from Debian. It's not like we're talking about oldstable as is the case of the Yocto LTS discussion. And also not like the QNX case where "stable" = "stale" because they only upgrade once a decade or so. Debian has a very reasonable update cycle for their stable releases. That also means this problem will solve itself in about 6 months, when Debian testing becomes the new stable. So if Alexandru can hold off for just a while longer. > Why should one prioritize folks that want to use the bleeding edge version > of a particular third-party library, yet can't be arsed to spend 5 > minutes to compile a new version of CMake from source. Everyone > able to compile Qt from source should have no trouble building CMake > themselves either, so I don't get why libraries stay on ancient versions > of CMake just because some users might not have a newer version by default. Barrier of entry. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Principal Engineer - Intel DCAI Platform & System Engineering
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
-- Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
