[Development] Qt 6 co-installability with Qt 5

Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer perezmeyer at gmail.com
Mon Nov 9 19:04:14 CET 2020


On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 at 13:17, Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira at intel.com> wrote:
> On Monday, 2 November 2020 06:21:49 PST Shawn Rutledge wrote:
> > Sorry for snipping so much, but it seems like all your arguments are about
> > tools that are used to build software (qmake, moc etc.).  And you have a
> > point there.
> > But I don’t see the point of renaming user-facing tools like assistant, qml,
> > qtdiag and pixeltool.   So I hope at least those will be spared.
> I made a list of which tools are user-facing and which ones are development.
> Of those in your list, I only agree with for assistant. And I add qdbus and
> qdbusviewer. A requirement for "user-facing" implies that the tool performs
> the same task without loss of functionality if it was upgraded.

I remember Kevin saying something about tools that use plugins too,
IIRC designer, but there might be other tools to consider in this
> > When it comes to the actual suffix to add, why use -qt6 instead of just 6?
> KDE Frameworks 5 tools added just a "5" so it's fine:

In fact yes, distros added -qt6 but -6 or just 6 could work too. I
think users might get it easier to understand with -qt6, but I lack
any serious data for that, just my ideas of maintaining Qt within

Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer

More information about the Development mailing list