Request to bump Qt version requirements to 4.6.3 for KDE SC 4.5 (and above)

[Ingo Klöcker]

On Thursday 08 July 2010, Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> On Thursday 08 of July 2010 19:28:01 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > On Thursday 8. July 2010 18.42.36 Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> > > The question is: who cares whether Qt minor releases are
> > > interchangeable or  not so that we can just specify minimal
> > > required dependencies to ensure only that stuff compiles?
> > > 
> > > "the build-time dependency should only be a minor release of Qt "
> > > - is this  policy written anywhere? Why is it more important
> > > that code compiles than providing better user experience? I
> > > think it's fundamental question.
> > 
> > The build-time requirement doesn't influence the run-time
> > requirement of Qt. You can compile against 4.6.3 and then run
> > against 4.6.0.
> > 
> > So requiring 4.6.3 to compile will NOT get your bug solved.
> 
> I disagree but let me explain.
> 
> Someone fetches KDE tarballs. Tries to build them - then encounters
> build error stating that Qt dependencies are not met. Person in
> question upgrades Qt, then builds KDE and problem has been solved by
> avoiding it.
> 
> If person in question is distro packager, he does the same, but he
> also ensures that runtime dependencies of packages he's preparing
> are matching build time dependencies. So problem has been avoided as
> well (note that KDE SC 4.5.0 is not out yet and number of bug
> reported already is significant).
> 
> If said person purposely hacks buildsystem to allow older Qt version
> - he should be ready to grab the pieces. The only case when bug is
> not "solved".
> 
> > You need to convince your distro to upgrade. And all KDE has to do
> > is to say that distros should upgrade.
> > 
> > And that should go without saying that distros should always
> > upgrade. And they do.
> > 
> > So what are you complaining about?
> > 
> > Bug reported -> ceck
> > Bug fixed -> check
> > Distros upgrading -> check
> 
> Right. But those users who will go through this exact same procedure
> over and over AGAIN. Because:
> - they weren't told Qt-4.6.2 is broken in this regard (why would
> they? they just grab packages and build from source against whatever
> Qt version they happen to have)
> or
> - packager who prepared packages for them was not told Qt-4.6.2 is
> broken in this regard.
> So the only reliable way for them to find out is to personally
> experience bug, fill it (or seach bugzilla first), then be told to
> go away and complain elsewhere (usually distro).
> And all of this could have been avoided if dependencies were raised
> in first place.

If you want to make sure that no packager forgets to update to Qt 4.6.2 
then send a message to the kde-packagers mailing list.


Regards,
Ingo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-buildsystem/attachments/20100708/2db42e3e/attachment-0001.sig