[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: kde-release-team
Subject: Re: Qt 5.4 for Plasma 5.2
From: Aleix Pol <aleixpol () kde ! org>
Date: 2014-10-30 11:23:06
Message-ID: CACcA1RpwGMc=-QtquVd-e42-SF-SBAzCTQmB_CfJQpB6bAjEOA () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 12:26 AM, Albert Astals Cid <aacid@kde.org> wrote:
> El Dimarts, 28 d'octubre de 2014, a les 18:40:27, Aleix Pol va escriure:
> > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 6:29 PM, Albert Astals Cid <aacid@kde.org>
> wrote:
> > > El Dimarts, 28 d'octubre de 2014, a les 15:26:46, Jonathan Riddell va
> > >
> > > escriure:
> > > > Qt 5.4 is due to be released sometime soon. Plasma 5.2 is due to be
> > > > released in January.
> > >
> > > Let's give some dates:
> > > * Qt 5.4 release -> 2 Dec
> > > * Plasma 5.2 beta -> 19 Dec (tars)
> > >
> > > This seems *very* close to me given that Qt has a quite good track at
> > > slipping
> > > the releases.
> > >
> > > So there are two questions here:
> > > * Is there something in Qt5.4 that makes it clear we want to use it?
> > > * Do we care if Plasma5.2 is delayed because Qt5.4 is delayed?
> > >
> > > Also going with Qt5.4 reduces greatly the amount of people that can
> > > contribute
> > > to those that want to build Qt themselves.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Albert
> > >
> > > > Plasma devs only want to support one version of Qt. There would be a
> > > > few
> > > > useful features in Qt 5.4 that Plasma could use but we could also
> hang
> > >
> > > back
> > >
> > > > with Qt 5.3 if distros needed it.
> > > >
> > > > Would it be a problem to need Qt 5.4 in Plasma 5.2?
> > > >
> > > > Jonathan
> >
> > What we discussed in the 5.2 hangout, was that whenever Qt 5.4.0 is
> > released for good, then we will decide to bump the Qt version
> requirement.
> > It was quite a heated argument by the way (for our standards anyway,
> nobody
> > got hurt ;)).
>
> So what's the hangout people view on the dates being so close and Qt
> probably
> slipping? Will you guys delay or?
>
It wasn't discussed. I would say that if Qt 5.4 is delayed Plasma 5.2 would
stay with Qt 5.3, but that's my conjecture.
Aleix
[Attachment #5 (text/html)]
<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 \
at 12:26 AM, Albert Astals Cid <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:aacid@kde.org" \
target="_blank">aacid@kde.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc \
solid;padding-left:1ex">El Dimarts, 28 d'octubre de 2014, a les 18:40:27, Aleix \
Pol va escriure:<br> <div><div class="h5">> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 6:29 PM, \
Albert Astals Cid <<a href="mailto:aacid@kde.org">aacid@kde.org</a>> wrote:<br> \
> > El Dimarts, 28 d'octubre de 2014, a les 15:26:46, Jonathan Riddell \
va<br> > ><br>
> > escriure:<br>
> > > Qt 5.4 is due to be released sometime soon. Plasma 5.2 is due to \
be<br> > > > released in January.<br>
> ><br>
> > Let's give some dates:<br>
> > * Qt 5.4 release -> 2 Dec<br>
> > * Plasma 5.2 beta -> 19 Dec (tars)<br>
> ><br>
> > This seems *very* close to me given that Qt has a quite good track at<br>
> > slipping<br>
> > the releases.<br>
> ><br>
> > So there are two questions here:<br>
> > * Is there something in Qt5.4 that makes it clear we want to use it?<br>
> > * Do we care if Plasma5.2 is delayed because Qt5.4 is delayed?<br>
> ><br>
> > Also going with Qt5.4 reduces greatly the amount of people that can<br>
> > contribute<br>
> > to those that want to build Qt themselves.<br>
> ><br>
> > Cheers,<br>
> ><br>
> > Albert<br>
> ><br>
> > > Plasma devs only want to support one version of Qt. There would be \
a<br> > > > few<br>
> > > useful features in Qt 5.4 that Plasma could use but we could also \
hang<br> > ><br>
> > back<br>
> ><br>
> > > with Qt 5.3 if distros needed it.<br>
> > ><br>
> > > Would it be a problem to need Qt 5.4 in Plasma 5.2?<br>
> > ><br>
> > > Jonathan<br>
><br>
> What we discussed in the 5.2 hangout, was that whenever Qt 5.4.0 is<br>
> released for good, then we will decide to bump the Qt version requirement.<br>
> It was quite a heated argument by the way (for our standards anyway, nobody<br>
> got hurt ;)).<br>
<br>
</div></div>So what's the hangout people view on the dates being so close and Qt \
probably<br> slipping? Will you guys delay or?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>It \
wasn't discussed. I would say that if Qt 5.4 is delayed Plasma 5.2 would stay \
with Qt 5.3, but that's my \
conjecture.</div><div><br></div><div>Aleix</div></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________
release-team mailing list
release-team@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic