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

[Ingo Klöcker]

On Thursday 08 July 2010, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> 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.

Of course I meant Qt 4.6.3.


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/20100709/b8dcb711/attachment.sig