On Tuesday, 16 June 2020 11:15:10 PDT Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> You'll get 5.15.x releases with a one-year delay from the commercial
> ones.
That's useless, because it means there's a one-year period in the middle with
no updates. For all intents and purposes, the LTS is dead for the free
softw
> Oddly enough, continued support for the Free Software ecosystem around
> Qt is one of the things most of us who work here care about deeply, so
I have no doubts that Qt engineers do. I can see this in in every code reciew
and I appreciate it very much!
> Our management, in any case, knows full
Hi Kevin,
On 16.06.2020 19:25, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Edward Welbourne wrote:
Kevin Kofler (16 June 2020 12:08)
What "shiny new features"? All that a real-world application such as
KWrite really needs from the operating system has been there at least
since the 1990s, possibly since the 1970s.
a
On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 at 21:04, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> >> Because all KDE applications will have to get ported to Qt 6 soon.
> > Why?
> ...because if they aren't, they won't get security fixes. (Because Qt 5
> is no longer maintained. Note that "LTS" isn't maintenance for Free
> Software, because
On 16/06/2020 13.37, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 at 20:27, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Edward Welbourne wrote:
Kevin Kofler (16 June 2020 12:08)
What "shiny new features"? All that a real-world application such as
KWrite really needs from the operating system has been there at least
On Tue, 16 Jun 2020 at 20:27, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Edward Welbourne wrote:
> > Kevin Kofler (16 June 2020 12:08)
> >> What "shiny new features"? All that a real-world application such as
> >> KWrite really needs from the operating system has been there at least
> >> since the 1990s, possibly si
Edward Welbourne wrote:
> Kevin Kofler (16 June 2020 12:08)
>> What "shiny new features"? All that a real-world application such as
>> KWrite really needs from the operating system has been there at least
>> since the 1990s, possibly since the 1970s.
>
> and I guess it's been in Qt for several rel
Edward Welbourne wrote:
>> So my bad, I said our product would only work on an ancient O/S or
>> two, when it could indeed to made to work on a whole bunch of more
>> modern systems *on which it would be irrelevant* - and thus not worth
>> the significant effort of porting to, because anyone develo
Edward Welbourne wrote:
> So my bad, I said our product would only work on an ancient O/S or two,
> when it could indeed to made to work on a whole bunch of more modern
> systems *on which it would be irrelevant* - and thus not worth the
> significant effort of porting to, because anyone developing
Edward Welbourne wrote:
>> If we *never* allow ourselves breaking changes, we'd still have a
>> nice stable product that worked great on an O/S or two from the last
>> century. Qt would thus be irrelevant.
Kevin Kofler (16 June 2020 01:36)
> Nonsense. We would have a nice stable product that just
Hi,
I'm also using clazy creating new checks and fix it to ease the transition to
Qt6 following https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTCREATORBUG-23750.
My fork is here: https://github.com/lugerard/clazy.
I'm using macOS. Clazy only work if using llvm 8 installed from macport and if
the path to the c
> On 16 Jun 2020, at 02:45, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
> Volker Hilsheimer wrote:
>> Sounds like y’all have a wonderful new business opportunity ahead of
>> yourselves: charge your new-leaf-app-on-old-OS customers handsomely for
>> the extra effort. After all, you do have to keep your Windows 7 test
12 matches
Mail list logo
