[Kde-pim] QT 5.6.0

[laurent Montel]

Le vendredi 15 avril 2016, 13:25:36 CEST Kevin Ottens a écrit :
> Hello,
> 
> On Friday, 15 April 2016 13:08:55 CEST laurent Montel wrote:
> > Le vendredi 15 avril 2016, 12:38:23 CEST Sandro Knauß a écrit :
> > > well but we don't have plasma as dependecy - kdepim should be
> > > installable
> > > without Plasma.  Argumeting about Plasma is not a valid argument.
> > 
> > But when we build from master we build plasma too
> 
> You do, I don't...

Perhaps but when we use kdesrcbuild we do it.

> Don't force your way of working onto others. Especially
> something as radical: again, you're proactively pushing potential
> contributors away with that thinking.

Potential contributors...
If I look at last months/last releases and I look at commit I don't see a lot 
of contributor no ?
For kdepim 5.2 how many contributors did you see ?

> > => it's a valid argument.
> 
> Definitely not.
> 
> > > > After that I worked to port to qtwebengine and my focus for 16.08 is
> > > > to
> > > > migrate all to qtwebengine.
> > > > So I will not wait 2 years to make it.
> > > > I work a lot on it so I will switch in several weeks.
> > > 
> > > Nobody talks about waiting two years, but as already mentioned Qt 5.6 is
> > > released only some weeks ago.
> > 
> > Yep but it's for master not official release.
> 
> Please re-read the thread, you should really realize that master doesn't
> mean "free for all, I do whatever I want and other will deal with it".
> If
> only for the CI you have to be much more responsible than that.
> 
> > > Why it is not a solution to check fot Qt5.6 and enable/disable the
> > > support
> > > when Qt5.6 is available?
> > 
> > Ok I will disable kmail/akregator/kontact/sieveeditor when not qt5.6.
> > I am not sure that it's a better idea but why not it's my second option.
> > 
> > > But my main point is: We need to discuss this first - before it is done
> > > silently. Can we agree in that?
> > 
> > You are against 5.6.
> > I am for using 5.6.
> 
> Why are you antagonizing this??

Because it's the case.
Sandro is against, I am for using 5.6 otherwise I am blocked.
So the discussion is finish, I will not stop to develop until a day where kf5 
depends against 5.6 and it will for sure to late for 16.08 for finishing this 
support.


> No one is "against 5.6" per say here... But most are trying to make you
> realize that you can't switch things like that when it pleases you, that's
> the price to pay for working with others and other teams,

Which "others" ?!
In kdepim/kdepim-addons who works on it ?!


> that's the price
> to pay to have one day a useful CI for KDEPIM.
> 
> Note that a "useful CI for KDEPIM" is badly needed if we want to have the
> faintest chance of reworking the applications architecture as discussed
> during the sprint. It is *that* important.

For sure it's important.

> > I am blocked for the moment to finish kmail qtwebengine support with
> > actual
> > code so I need to switch it for finish it.
> > I didn't activate it for 16.04 as Qt5.6 was not release now it's release
> > so
> > I will switch.
> > I will not wait august 2016 to wait for finding bugs.
> 
> You really should look at the situation in a less binary way... master could
> start depending on Qt 5.6 at some point, maybe even before august who
> knows.

As you write Nobody knows.


> But this needs to be discussed and orchestrated properly to not
> generate pain for everyone else but you.

As all discussions it will be an endless discussion as I need it and during 
this time it will just me which works on kdepim as usual...

> Regards.


-- 
Laurent Montel | laurent.montel at kdab.com | KDE/Qt Senior Software Engineer
KDAB (France) S.A.S., a KDAB Group company
Tel. France +33 (0)4 90 84 08 53,  http://www.kdab.fr

_______________________________________________
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/