Would distributions have an issue if KF 5.77+ would require Qt >= 5.14 (instead of >= 5.13 as of now)?

[Jonathan Riddell]

Not from KDE neon of course, we're on 5.15.  And not from the KDE snaps
build either.  But I suppose there's more than just Linux distros to
consider as we ship apps using KDE frameworks on Flatpak, Android, Windows,
even Mac to ponder too.

Jonathan


On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 12:14, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau <kossebau at kde.org>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> last week KDE Frameworks master saw a bump in the required/expected
> minimal Qt
> version to Qt 5.13, following rules once agreed and noted here:
> https://community.kde.org/Frameworks/Policies#Frameworks_Qt_requirements
>
> I would like to challenge that former decision though and propose to
> instead
> go straight to Qt 5.14 as minimum requirement now.
>
>
> QUESTION:
> Would any of the distributions have an issue with requiring Qt 5.14
> instead of
> Qt 5.13?
>
>
> From some quick checks using https://repology.org/ it seems that any
> distribution versions which currently use Qt 5.13 have also settled on
> some
> older KF version, so will not update to just KF 5.77 and thus be screwed.
>
> Motivation:
> * KDE CI not setup ATM to cover builds with Qt 5.13 (no build, no unit
> tests)
> * Qt 5.14 added some new API, chance to miss out when using that in new
> code
> * C++: no need to write #if QT_VERSION < QT_VERSION_CHECK(5, 14, 0)
> variants
> * QML: no need to do hard-to-read generation tricks to support < Qt 5.14
> * Qt 5.13 went out-of-support in June
> * App bundle builders would rather use some recent Qt 5.14/5.15
>
> So by restraining to Qt 5.13 as minimum version IMHO we would make/keep
> life
> complicated for KF contributors without adding any value for anyone.
>
> With most of KDE Frameworks in my local checkout:
>     grep "QT_VERSION_CHECK(5, 14, 0)"  frameworks/*/src -r 2>/dev/null | \
>         grep "QT_VERSION " | wc -l
> gives me "92", so there are quite some code variants which need support in
> current code.
>
> From the emails at least in
> https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-frameworks-devel/2020-July/112712.html
> I could not see a discussion whether Qt 5.13 makes
> sense at all now, seems mainly the algorithm was applied. I propose to
> match
> the result to known real world needs now. Or teach me what I have missed
> here
> :)
>
> Cheers
> Friedrich
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-frameworks-devel/attachments/20201201/e5c77d4c/attachment.htm>