Moving KWayland to frameworks

[Boudhayan Gupta]

On 10 December 2015 at 12:32, Martin Graesslin <mgraesslin at kde.org> wrote:
> yes, that's the annoying one which is lots of work and lots of possible
> regressions. I'm not sure whether I'm willing to do that work which I consider
> a useless exercise.

In my opinion this discussion is an useless exercise, because:

> Well it doesn't need to be a global bump of compiler requirements. But we
> could consider different compiler requirements for frameworks which are non-
> portable. KWayland will never be built on Windows neither on OSX. So any
> compiler restrictions on it just shouldn't matter.

Exactly. Anything that's Wayland related is supposed to be on the
bleeding edge right now. Setting compiler restrictions on this
particular framework will serve only to (apologies for my language,
but there really is not a more apt term for this) cockblock KWayland
development. Developing new technologies from scratch is hard; being
unable to use easier constructs for solving problems not only makes
your job harder but frustrates you more (it's there, why can't I use
this?)

I may be wrong, but I'm guessing Wayland came quite a while after
gcc-4.5 did, and that they use features that require gcc>4.5.

IMO non-portable frameworks should not be subject to the global
compiler requirements at all, but use more platform-appropriate
compiler requirements.

-- Boudhayan