From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 976AA15812D for ; Thu, 02 Jan 2025 11:29:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9D64CE083D; Thu, 02 Jan 2025 11:29:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from devloop.de (devloop.de [IPv6:2a01:4f8:251:53a0::2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38F58E0825 for ; Thu, 02 Jan 2025 11:29:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [IPV6:2003:ed:ff42:a410::11cd] ([2003:ed:ff42:a410::11cd]) (AUTH: PLAIN damage@devloop.de, TLS: TLSv1.3,128bits,TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) by devloop.de with ESMTPSA id 00000000000201C3.00000000677678AB.0001239F; Thu, 02 Jan 2025 11:29:47 +0000 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2025 12:29:47 +0100 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Fwd: [gentoo-dev] Please actively drop support for Qt5 wherever possible To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <3346777.aeNJFYEL58@tuxbrain.fritz.box> Content-Language: en-US From: Daniel Buschke In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 08dd1c1c-ef2f-4fb7-918c-0b253ea44a0d X-Archives-Hash: 30848a48759a6c1c8fc0e917ac970c9e Am 02.01.25 um 12:13 schrieb Zoltan Puskas: >> >> So, removing Qt5 will break computers of many users, including my computer. >> In the course of many years of existence of Qt5 a large number of useful >> programs have been created; not all of them have been ported to Qt6. Are we >> going to throw away all this wealth? >> > > Is there a timeline for killing QT5 completely or will just QT5 be stuck at the > current version and patch level? That's what I thought first, too. And I think that is the question which has to be answered before making a decision. As long as someone, who could be referred to as upstream, patches QT5, I would personally be fine with using QT5. But once that support drops, we are talking about an unsupported biiiiig piece of software which you don't want to have on your computer. I searched the web and found a blog entry [1] talking about extended commercial(!) support ending mid 2025. But I don't know QT enough to qualify this information. regards Daniel [1] https://www.qt.io/blog/qt-5.15-extended-support-for-subscription-license-holders