[Development] Proposal: All Qt modules must use the same version number

Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer perezmeyer at gmail.com
Sun Jun 29 21:19:59 CEST 2014

On Friday 27 June 2014 11:28:14 Koehne Kai wrote:
> My 2 cents from the packaging/installer side: Any artifact that is heavily
> bound to a specific Qt build / release, but isn't part of the Qt package
> itself, is making things complicated.

As distro packager, yes, it's making things complicated.


> That's of course only the binary installer ... I can't judge whether e.g.
> distributions would appreciate separate releases of QtWebEngine.

No if it uses private headers.

I currently need to rebuild on all arches gammaray, fcitx-qt and pyqt5 each 
time I upload a new point release for this exact problem [0]. I would really 
like to avoid adding new stuff to that list, as it is a real PITA.

[0] Even if API/ABI matches, there seems to be a runtime detection of 
different versions of Qt in qobjectprivate. I can really understand why that 
check is there, so the best solution is to avoid "third party" stuff to use 
private headers. Having a different release schedule will certainly make any 
package count as "third party" in my POV.

Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.
Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.
 -- Groucho Marx

Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20140629/16b7fff4/attachment.sig>

More information about the Development mailing list