[lsb-discuss] Moving Qt4 to required for LSB 3.2

Aaron J. Seigo aseigo at kde.org
Mon Apr 23 09:14:19 PDT 2007

On Monday 23 April 2007, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 11:49:06 +0200
> Olaf Schmidt <ojschmidt at kde.org> wrote:
> > [ Alan Cox, Fr., 20. Apr. 2007 ]
> >
> > > I would concur that this is several years too early in the big scheme
> > > of things to make QT4 mandatory.
> >
> > Several years?
> Distributions lacking QT4 will be shipping and in regular use for several
> more years before they begin to tail off and go out of production. That
> means in practical terms application vendors won't be able to require Qt4
> for some time.

which is fine; those distros will be LSB 3.1 compliant with the implicit 
understanding that there is no guarantee of an LSB Qt4 there.

by putting Qt4 in 3.2, as expected, then applications which do say "LSB 3.2" 
will be able to count on it. applications are still free to say "LSB 3.1", of 
course, and get wider deployment.

but if we don't put Qt4 in 3.2 then when it comes time for the next LSB we'll 
be in this exact same situation. IOW, we need to actually put the train on 
the tracks at some point so that it arrives at the next station at -some- 
point in time.

and it sounds like you do both understand and agree with that, so ... onward. 

Aaron J. Seigo
humru othro a kohnu se
GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA  EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43

Full time KDE developer sponsored by Trolltech (http://www.trolltech.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/lsb-discuss/attachments/20070423/a3056803/attachment.pgp 

More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list