[Slackbuilds-users] Qt 5.9 LTS released

[Harald Achitz]

Hi Willy
Thanks for the explanation, even if it makes me sad to hear that, in case
of Qt, stability and predictability is not the primary concern of SBo. What
just confirms what I said, that it is better to use own Qt builds, LTS for
apps that make use of QT, own latest dev builds for future development of
application. What SBo provides is not a compromise, it is just something
random in between.
This is of course just IMHO, everyone is of course free to use what ever
unstable and not longer supported Qt version he or she wants to use, as it
is oK for SBo and some maintainer that calls technical facts bogus to
decide what to provide and what not.

/Harald

2017-06-04 9:44 GMT+02:00 Willy Sudiarto Raharjo <willysr at slackbuilds.org>:

> > 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
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SlackBuilds-users mailing list
> SlackBuilds-users at slackbuilds.org
> http://lists.slackbuilds.org/mailman/listinfo/slackbuilds-users
> Archives - https://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/
> FAQ - https://slackbuilds.org/faq/
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.slackbuilds.org/pipermail/slackbuilds-users/attachments/20170604/b3021fb8/attachment.html>