[Slackbuilds-users] Qt 5.9 LTS released

[Willy Sudiarto Raharjo]

> what do you want to tell me?
> Ok, I was wrong, there was for some weeks a stable version of Qt on SBo,
> did not notice it because at this time I had already to use my own builds,
> why?
> the update to 5.6 was a half year late, and than instead of staying on the
> stable LTS version the jump to the next developer version was done.
> And instead of having a 3 years supporter Qt version in SBo, what would
> reduce the amount of work, now there is a version that is basically already
> eof .
> Calling this info bogus is as ignorant as putting some URLs up and ignore
> the info I provide and do so as everything is wonderful
> So what's the point in showing me the URLs and the version history of Qt in
> SBo, it just shows that it is totally wrong. Have self a look at it and
> understand why

Hi Harald,

Let me clarify a bit about the version history from GIT:

Qt 5.6 got released on March 2016 and 5.6.1 got released on June 2016.
During this period we had a submission freeze for SBo and we were
focused on testing all scripts in the repository. For a library such as
Qt which is used by many other projects, we prefer to wait until it
reached it's first point release (.1) because major release normally
breaks many things (removal of QWebKit in 5.6). That's why you see i
bumped Qt to 5.6.1 in June, 19 2016, 2 weeks after first point release.

Qt 5.7 was released in June, 16 2016, but as usual, we prefer to wait
for first point release, which was released in December 2016, so Larry
bumped to 5.7.1 in January (roughly 3 weeks from it's release date,
because we had to test other scripts first for about 1 week)

Now, the reason why Larry insist on staying at 5.7.x is because another
script (PyQt5) can't be bumped to higher version unless sip package in
Slackware got updated (which is not at this moment and it won't happen
in -stable since it will affect many other packages as well). I believe
it's reasonable and i can understand his opinion on this one. He is
willing to support newer Qt, but that is for next development cycle.

Bumping to 5.9 will surely break some scripts and some others may have
to be removed due to incompatibility with Qt 5.9. Not to mention the
efforts to make sure all scripts are compatible with the just-released
Qt 5.9. I would consider that (or Qt 5.10) for next development cycle :)

As for LTS, i can understand the benefit of a long term support, but
other than that, it's basically just a regular release. This is my
personal opinion, it doesn't reflect other admins opinions.

AlienBOB is *probably* looking at Qt 5.9 for his future KDE 5 / Plasma
releases.


-- 
Willy Sudiarto Raharjo

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/attachments/20170604/55952f32/attachment-0001.asc>