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

List:       kde-promo
Subject:    [kde-promo] Re: Qt5 -> KDE5?
From:       Markus Slopianka <markus.s () kdemail ! net>
Date:       2011-05-09 22:35:17
Message-ID: 201105100035.17495.markus.s () kdemail ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

Am Montag 09 Mai 2011, 18:03:18 schrieb Olivier Goffart:
> Hi,
> 
> With Qt5 around the corner[1], I think it is time to start thinking about
> KDE5

Sad to see that even our own guys still don't get the rebranding even after almost \
two  years.
Qt 5 results in no need to think about "KDE5" because there will be no such thing as 
"KDE4".
The only thing Qt 5 does is to enforce "KDE Platform 5" because of the broken binary 
compatibility.
KDE Plasma Workspaces can stay at 4.x and build on Platform 5 unless KPW magically \
becomes  something totally different that justifies a major version jump. Change of \
the back-end  alone does IMO not justify a big version jump for KPW just as Phonon \
did not jump to 5.0  just because xine was deprecated in favor of VLC and GStreamer. \
Nothing from KPW  guaranties binary compatibility which IMO means that the user \
workflow has to change  dramatically for a big version jump.

If classic QWidgets stay, I also don't see why KDE Applications need to jump from 4.x \
to  5.0. Most will just be recompiled to use the new Platform 5 without any huge GUI 
facelifts.

Markus

> 
> 
> 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.
> 
> 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?
> 
> - 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.

 
_______________________________________________
This message is from the kde-promo mailing list.

Visit https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-promo to unsubscribe, set digest on \
or temporarily stop your subscription.


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