From kde-core-devel  Mon May 09 17:19:31 2011
From: Martin =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Gr=E4=DFlin?= <mgraesslin () kde ! org>
Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 17:19:31 +0000
To: kde-core-devel
Subject: Re: Qt5 -> KDE5?
Message-Id: <3126599.YpVvDOBq38 () martin-desktop>
X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=130496161426243
MIME-Version: 1
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--nextPart2599039.WFFxOuPD6s"


--nextPart2599039.WFFxOuPD6s
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

On Monday 09 May 2011 18:03:18 Olivier Goffart wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> With Qt5 around the corner[1], I think it is time to start thinking about KDE5
> 
> 
> Raw summary:
>  - Qt5 is planed to be released in about one year from now if everything goes 
> well.
>  - It should be mostly source compatible with Qt4, and is just an opportunity 
> to break binary compatibility.
>  - QWidget just stay for compatibility. All focus is put on QML. Do not expect 
> new development on QWidgets from Nokia.
>  - The "OpenGouvernance" should finaly come into light, meaning we (as KDE), 
> can contribute easier to Qt.
> 
> 
> I guess it make sens, as Qt breaks binary compatibility, to do the same in 
> kdelibs.
> Does that mean "KDE 5"? or "KDE SC 5"? Not necessarily. 
> We can break binary compatibility, and change the .so version of our library 
> without changing the major version of KDE itself.
> But I think it would anyway still be a smart move to do it.
While I agree we should call it "5", I think that some users would prefer to have no .0 again. 
And I doubt it will matter how much we tell that it's not like the last time.
> 
> And I think this is a perfect opportunity to get some KDE class in Qt as we 
> planed. [2]
> 
> Some item we might want to think about:
> 
>  - Do we want "KDE 5" to be a big change, or just a small increment?
> 
>  - Do we want to focus on QML, or stay with QWidget?
I think you answered that question with the lessions to be learned from KDE4 quite nicely.
> 
>  - Shall we try drive Qt5 based on KDE5's need?
> 
>  - Do we have more visions for what KDE5 should or should not be?
> 
> I guess there is as many opinions as people involved :-)
> Many things to think about, and that can be discussed further, and decided in 
> Platform11 [3] (I will be there)
> 
> But in my opinion, if there is something we should learn from the KDE4 
> transition, it is not to be too ambitious.
> 
> -- 
> Olivier
> 
> [1] http://labs.qt.nokia.com/2011/05/09/thoughts-about-qt-5/
> [2] http://community.kde.org/KDE_Core/QtMerge
> [3] http://community.kde.org/KDE_Core/Platform_11

--nextPart2599039.WFFxOuPD6s
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEABECAAYFAk3IIiMACgkQqVXwidMiVroMaACgl+UECbKKyaZsMsm6iMx2h+TA
prgAoIElROqXiKwnt5qw4rCGRo6cyeKs
=1y6R
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart2599039.WFFxOuPD6s--