Can we raise Qt dep to 4.8? And KDE to 4.8.4? (was: broken compatibility with Qt 4.6)

[Myriam Schweingruber]

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Matěj Laitl <matej at laitl.cz> wrote:
> On 28. 11. 2012 Edward Toroshchin wrote:
>> Hey strohel, guys,
>>
>> I just wanted to note that the ui in commit 126d350 breaks our
>> compatibility with 4.6 (and up to 4.7.4 even). The lines:
>>
>> +     <property name="icon">
>> +      <iconset theme="list-add"/>
>> +     </property>
>>
>> The error:
>>
>> uic: Error in line 20, column 33 : Unexpected attribute theme
>> File
>> '/home/mayank/kde/src/amarok/src/configdialog/dialogs/ExcludedLabelsDialog.
>> ui' is not valid
>
> Oh I see, kudos for you for discovering it early! I've added it unaware that
> it is not supported by not-so-recent Qt versions. (but I was surprised that Qt
> Designer allowed me to specify icon by name)
>
>> So we could either tweak the ui, or just bump the qt dependency.
>
> I would definitely bump dependency to Qt 4.8. Debian testing has it and we
> already thought about that in summer. And we don't really test on Qt 4.6/4.7
> so we usually don't spot errors. I've even seen some Amarok code comments
> complaining that it would like to use Qt 4.8 feature. If someone knows a
> reason not to dump the dependency, shout now or be quiet forever. :-)
>
> On a related note, what are your views on bumping our mandatory KDE dependency
> to 4.8.4? Debian testing has it. That would allow us to remove some ugly work-
> arounds in IpodCollectionFactory and perhaps remove some copied code
> (KRatingPainter? needs checking). This can wait, for sure, I'm just not
> entirely comfortable with releasing Amarok 2.7 claiming it is compatible with
> KDE 4.6/4.7 when it gets so little testing.

Yes, please go ahead, this makes perfect sense, especially since
Debian wheezy has it and most other distributions already ship 4.9.3
and also plan to ship KDE 4.10 as soon as it is released.

Regards, Myriam
-- 
Proud member of the Amarok and KDE Community
Protect your freedom and join the Fellowship of FSFE:
http://www.fsfe.org
Please don't send me proprietary file formats,
use ISO standard ODF instead (ISO/IEC 26300)