[lsb-discuss] Qt 4 decision
robert.schweikert at mathworks.com
Wed Sep 5 10:55:28 PDT 2007
My main concern is that we re-create "the RHEL 3 problem". Once we push
Qt4 to mandatory and obsolete the current version we will cut RHEL 4 as
a target for ISVs that must certify to LSB 3.2 due to other reasons.
I realize we need to move forward in some way, but think we should take
this opportunity to define a set of rules we can fall back on when we
come to this or similar juncture again in the future.
If we can ever manage to push the LSB into a leading standard role the
problem will go away, but this will be difficult and time consuming.
Jeff Licquia wrote:
> We've had the Qt 4 issue hanging for a while now, and the time has come
> to make up our minds. There has been some discussion of the issues of
> upgrading Qt 4 to mandatory, and some responses (by, among others,
> TrollTech, who has indicated they are willing to fix issues that need
> So, it's time to hash it out and fix things, or decide finally that
> we're not going to do it for some set of good reasons.
> As of now, the LSB position is that Qt 4 will become mandatory for LSB
> 3.2, subject to TrollTech's assistance in uplifting the standard such
> that it covers the common set of Qt 4 ABIs shipping in the major distros
> currently shipping in LSB 3.1-certified distros, and in otherwise fixing
> QA issues in the current Qt 4 specs and tests.
> - TrollTech: can we count on your support?
> - Could those who have objected in the past summarize their objections
> and rationales, or otherwise indicate if they've changed their minds?
> Let's please have this discussion on the list, if for no other reason
> that it helps document the results in a public place.
> lsb-discuss mailing list
> lsb-discuss at lists.linux-foundation.org
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
(robert.schweikert at mathworks.com) LINUX
The MathWorks Inc.
Phone : 508-647-2042
More information about the lsb-discuss