[Kde-pim] QT 5.6.0

[Kevin Ottens]

Hello,

On Friday, 15 April 2016 09:36:39 CEST Kevin Funk wrote:
> On Friday, April 15, 2016 9:11:54 AM CEST laurent Montel wrote:
> > Le vendredi 15 avril 2016, 08:55:37 CEST Kevin Funk a écrit :
> > > On Friday, April 15, 2016 8:46:48 AM CEST laurent Montel wrote:
> > > > Le vendredi 15 avril 2016, 01:48:58 CEST Sandro Knauß a écrit :
> > > > > I see that the firsmt bumps to Qt 5.6 are made in messagelib etc.
> > > > > These make the CI unhappy because there is no Qt 5.6 available.
> > > > 
> > > > CI needs to install it.

Sorry but not the right way to see it. CI doesn't install anything. There are 
people, putting a lot of work in the CI to please us and cater need of the 
hundreds of repositories we have. You can't just bump a dependency like that 
and then say "do your thing slackers!".

In situations like that, especially when it's Qt which requires special 
handling and is a pain to have working on the CI, you should ask nicely to the 
sysadmins, and only once they managed to have a newer dependency for you then 
you can perhaps make the new version mandatory.

Otherwise this is rather bad form in my opinion.

> > > [...]
> > > so why force 5.6 on users just because of an optional
> > > dependency? You should try to keep it optional for the time being.
> > 
> > Nope.

Sorry but yes, you should try.

You can't complain about the lack of contributors and at the same time make it 
harder for people to contribute...

> > > I'm also saying this as developer who (sometimes) compiles kdepim. Not
> > > even Ubuntu 16.04 LTS (unreleased) ships Qt 5.6, thus I wouldn't be able
> > > to kdepim against my distro Qt.
> > 
> > 16.04 is the last released version.
> 
> Let me just say:
> 
> I agree with Sandro, I don't think this is a particularly clever move. This
> raises the bar for (potential) contributors quite a bit, even for me(!)
> who's usually compiling KDE master against distro Qt. Following the KF5
> minimum Qt requirements is usually a good thing (Qt 5.4 atm).

I have to agree with Sandro and Kevin F here.

I think your effort to switch to QtWebEngine in KDEPIM is both laudable and 
really needed... But it has ramifications and as such should take into account 
synchronization with other groups which includes the release team (including 
Sandro) and the sysadmins (because of the CI). Otherwise it'll turn something 
needed into something hated.

Regards.
-- 
Kévin Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net

KDAB - proud supporter of KDE, http://www.kdab.com

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-pim/attachments/20160415/c4890e8b/attachment.sig>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
KDE PIM mailing list kde-pim at kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-pim
KDE PIM home page at http://pim.kde.org/