Qt 3.2 requirement

[Chris Howells]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi,

On Monday 28 July 2003 10:49, Chris Howells wrote:
> > Naturally some people want to play with new stuff, that is perfectly
> > fine. Others want to keep stuff stable, that's also a worthwhile  goal.
>
> We're talking about CVS HEAD here. HEAD is not stable. That's the point.

Let me expand on that.

KDE 3.2 _will_ depend on Qt 3.2 when KDE 3.2 is released (if it doesn't it'll
be extremely disappointing for users of the new languages supported in Qt
3.2). I don't think anybody is in any doubt about that.

Switching to Qt 3.2 will allow us to test Qt 3.2 and find any problems leading
to a nice stable KDE 3.2/Qt 3.2.x combination when KDE 3.2 is released.

Your argument doesn't make any sense at all to me. Putting off the inevitable
to the last minute potentially means that the KDE 3.2/Qt 3.2 combination will
be _largely untested_ causing problems which will have us wishing we started
testing with Qt 3.2 as a requirement sooner.

In one of your previous mails you send "You unnecessarily force all the
developers to test QT". Well if the developers don't test Qt, who do you
think will? The users who have crashes and report them on http://bugs.kde.
org?

- --
Cheers, Chris Howells -- chris at chrishowells.co.uk, howells at kde.org
Web: http://chrishowells.co.uk, PGP ID: 0x33795A2C
KDE/Qt/C++/PHP Developer: http://www.kde.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2-rc1-SuSE (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/JPTLF8Iu1zN5WiwRAmJMAKCgtS2ZIaEBydelepd/G5jw8QNxIgCfV0ay
2JWWpynxrYzu6jyEi4YxOQE=
=0MHR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----