[Development] New reference platforms in the CI for Qt5.2

[Charley Bay]

>
> Tony sayeth:
>>>
>>>> <snip>,
>>>>
>>>> We'd like to change the reference platforms a bit. We have new
>>>> platforms coming in and old ones are just that.old.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> <snip>,
>>>>
>>>> These changes would be targeted for Qt 5.2 and the current proposition
>>>> can be seen here:
>>>>
>>>> http://qt-project.org/wiki/CI_Configurations
>>>>
>>>> (That web page has been badly out of date, but I'm automating the
>>>> update process of it currently.
>>>> I will also keep the Qt argument list up to date so that you can see
>>>> what the differences are between the configurations.)
>>>> <snip>,
>>>
>>>

charley:

This is a helpful page -- thanks!
>>>
>>> QUESTION:  I see MSVC2012 start to show up for Win8 (only), and Win7
>>> mostly stays with MSVC2010.
>>>
>>> Because Microsoft is pushing updates for their MSVC2012 (they are no
>>> longer updating MSVC2010, and it misses much C++11), our impression is that
>>> MSVC2010 is like "Vista", where it's just easier to "move-along" to the
>>> next version.  However, we will be Win7 for the foreseeable future (we have
>>> no current efforts investigating Win8).
>>>
>>> Thus, our (Windows) "reference" platforms are MSVC2008 and MSVC2012 (we
>>> have no interest in 2010).  Are other people doing this too?  Is there
>>> interest in moving to MSVC2012 at the expense of MSVC2010?
>>>
>>
Laszlo:


>> A few months ago, we moved from 2008 to 2010 because we were using Qt4
>> for that project, and there were no official 2012 packages. I do not work
>> anymore in that project, but the plan was to move to 2012 once the Qt 4 to
>> 5 migration would take place.
>>
>> My impression is, and experience for that matter, a 2010 to 2012 change
>> is a common ongoing practice for Qt 5 customers. I have not seen many
>> people using 2008 with Qt 5.
>>
>
Agreed -- we looked at building Qt5 with MSVC2008, and I've seen reports on
the web that people have done it, but I don't know that it "buys" you much.

I should have been more clear for our (Windows) reference platforms:

*- Qt4 + MSVC2008 (sustaining development only)
*- Qt5 + MSVC2012 (existing and new development)

...where we have no interest in MSVC2010 (Microsoft seems to call it "done"
with no more updates).  Further, we will probably move quickly from
2012=>2013, as it looks like a pretty good (stable) compiler with the
"current active love and attention" by Microsoft.

qtnext wrote:

> for X64, msvc2012 is fine, but it seems that for XP 32, msvc 2012 is not
> possible If I have correctly understand.


Yes, we've been following the drama there as we have XP-embedded (32-bit)
with Qt4.  (Funny stories all-around there.)  For the casual reader, the
original MS solution was to use the 2010 compiler for XP, which you could
launch from within the 2012 IDE.  However, after community uproar, there
have been several patches/updates by Microsoft to reverse the decision, and
it now looks like 2012 officially targets XP:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13130713/how-to-compile-for-win-xp-with-visual-studio-2012

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/14349793/c-program-written-in-vs2012-works-w-win7-8-2008r2-2012-but-not-2003-xp-32bit

(In other news, porting from 2010 to 2012 is a little more work for legacy
MFC users, as there was some shuffling in the "AfxWin.h" and "Windows.h"
headers; however, the 2012=>2013 port seems to be rather trivial, and the
C++ improvements appear to be significant, which is partly why we want it
as soon as we are able.)

For the Qt community, though, my suggestion for "reference platforms" would
be something like:

----
FOR TODAY:
----
*- Qt4 + MSVC2008 (sustaining development only)
  ...I see no real advantage for Qt4+MSVC2010, nobody is sustaining fielded
releases with this combination, I'm not sure they should bother...

*- Qt5 + MSVC2012 (existing and new development)
  ...I see no real advantage for Qt5+MSVC2010, nobody is sustaining fielded
releases with this combination, I'm not sure they should bother...

----
FOR SOON (AFTER STABLE MSVC2013):
----
*- Qt5 + MSVC2013 (existing and new development)
  ...Could also provide Qt5+MSVC2012 for the "transition", should be
"easy/cheap" because the headers are similar (identical?), but I'd expect
most people would move over to 2013 for new development, perhaps keeping
2012 for sustaining...

--charley
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20130811/71218bb3/attachment.html>