[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: Qt 3.2 requirement
From:       Bernhard Reiter <bernhard () intevation ! de>
Date:       2003-07-25 20:08:07
[Download RAW message or body]


On Friday 25 July 2003 19:47, Ralf Nolden wrote:
> On Freitag, 25. Juli 2003 14:32, Bernhard Reiter wrote:

> > In my experience your argument leads a huge block
> > consisting of QT /kdelibs /application that is changed altogether,
> > leading to a lower quality of the overall system

> > When trying to fix bugs in currently used KDE versions,
> > I've frequently been pointed to try the "latest" and "greatest"
> > version from CVS on the whole block because that was what
> > developers are using. It leads to problems which were not present
> > before and I did not get to the point in actually fixing the application
> > bug. It is not a weak argument, because stablising KDE application code
> > towards a certainly level is getting very cost intensive.
>
> If you use qt-copy that's your fault :-)

It is not a good process to force the stability and schedule of QT 
onto KDE nor the kdelibs schedule on the applications.

>  You should take the official
> release version from Trolltech and the beta versions of that version have
> been tested with KDE plus the results folded back into Qt. 

That didn't help way back then.

> You won't and can't prevent developers to use the newest library and so over time the
> whole thing becomes a restriction to say we only use qt-3.1.x because
> qt-3.2 may have the classes you want to use. Also, for those who want to
> test indian languages they *need* to take Qt 3.2. It *will* be a
> requirement. The more it is tested, the better, because within the
> timeframe of the KDE 3.2 release a bugfix release of Qt 3.2 will be
> available for sure, so we can have KDE 3.2 use a *stable* and *well-tested*
> Qt 3.2.x

I wouldn't fully agree with this.
KDE libs should have their own stability criteria and not getting forced by 
the QT schedule. You unnecessarily force all the developers to test QT.


["smime.p7s" (application/pkcs7-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]