From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nimai Mahajan Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2018 17:42:57 +0000 Subject: [Buildroot] Drop support for Qt 5.6? [was: [RFC 1/2] qt5: bump latest version to 5.10.0] In-Reply-To: <20180225172619.GA2276@scaer> References: <20180211161320.8864-1-gael.portay@savoirfairelinux.com> <20180211161320.8864-2-gael.portay@savoirfairelinux.com> <1518442630960-0.post@n4.nabble.com> <78215947-020b-17da-27d8-89bcdfe1c859@mind.be> <20180225172619.GA2276@scaer> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On Sun, Feb 25, 2018, 12:26 PM Yann E. MORIN wrote: > Arnout, All, > > On 2018-02-25 18:06 +0100, Arnout Vandecappelle spake thusly: > > On 12-02-18 14:37, nimaim wrote: > > > This is semi unrelated, but along would this, would it make sense to > bump the > > > current Qt LTS version from 5.6.x to 5.9.x (currently 5.9.4, which > should > > > also be bumped from the 5.9.3 currently in the BR repo), and use this > 5.10.x > > > version as BR2_PACKAGE_QT5_VERSION_LATEST as currently proposed? > > > > The problem is that 5.6.x is the last version that still was LGPL-2.0. > For some > > companies this could be a problem. > > > > That said, I'm not particularly in favour of keeping old, unmaintained > and > > probably vulnerable versions of packages just for companies' irrational > fears of > > 3.0. It is clear from all the conditions we currently have that such > maintenance > > does not come for free... > > > > So, any objections to replace Qt 5.6 with Qt 5.9? > > Yes, I do object it. > > As you said, this is the last version that was GPL-2/LGPL-2.1 (for most > parts), so removing it means some companies will be left out in the > cold, not being able to update. > > This was one of the most important reasons this choice was added. > I completely overlooked the bump to LGPLv3, my apologies. As mentioned, it forces many companies to use the commercial license due to much more stringent rules, which is unacceptable. That being said, we use Qt at work on a daily basis and 5.6 is missing tons of new features and security updates, which forced us to move to 5.9.x. 5.9.x added the new qt quick controls 2 embedded controls, which just about every project today is using, especially on embedded devices that are resource limited. But yes many projects are also still using 5.6. I think the only compromise here is to rework the Qt build system to leave the Qt 5.6.x LTS series (legacy LTS), add in Qt 5.9.x LTS (latest LTS), and Qt 5.10.x as the bleeding edge / latest. I'm not sure how others feel about that though and how much work that is. It's not trivial to test all 3 versions on the myriad of architectures and platforms Buildroot supports. > Regards, > Yann E. MORIN. > > -- > > .-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------. > | Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' > conspiracy: | > | +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ > | > | +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is > no | > | http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v > conspiracy. | > > '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------' > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: