[lsb-discuss] Modularization design proposal

Robert Schweikert rjschwei at suse.com
Tue Apr 3 22:26:58 UTC 2012



On 03/30/2012 06:12 PM, Wichmann, Mats D wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 4:08 PM, Craig Scott <audiofanatic at gmail.com
> <mailto:audiofanatic at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Just wondering how the Qt modularisation would work. Would it
>     include Qt3 and Qt4? With Qt5 about to come out, Qt3 will shortly be
>     end-of-lifed (many would argue it already has been). There has been
>     a long time with Qt3 being deprecated, so it could be argued that
>     Qt3 is just about ripe for removal from the LSB for the LSB 5.0 release.
>
>
> it's almost certain qt3 will be dropped for 5.0, but your question is
> still an interesting one, as we would have to think about does a qt
> module mandate two qt versions at the same time when qt5 does become a
> candidate - which is probably not for 5.0

Basically I agree with Mats, QT3 will be gone for 5.0 and Qt5 will not 
be a candidate for 5.0. But I'd like to take this a bit father. IMHO we 
should not have 2 versions of the same toolkit "active" at the same 
time. Meaning when we add Qt5 we should deprecate Qt4. The result is 
that the LSB-Toolkit-Qt module always points to the latest version and 
there will be a version LSB-Toolkit-QtX where X stands in for the 
version of the deprecated toolkit.

Yes, this means people that insist on sticking to things we deprecate 
have to change their dependency checking code.

Robert

-- 
Robert Schweikert                           MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
SUSE-IBM Software Integration Center                   LINUX
Tech Lead
rjschwei at suse.com
rschweik at ca.ibm.com
781-464-8147


More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list