[Development] Status of the QtFeedback module

Jonah BrĂ¼chert jbb at kaidan.im
Tue Apr 27 03:08:09 CEST 2021

Hi Chris,

> Given that the rate of change in the repository is
> so slow, why is packaging from git snapshot difficult in this case?

Distros are a bit hesitant to package git snapshots in general, as it 
usually breaks their workflow for checking for a new upstream version. 
The module being unreleased also regularly creates doubts about it being 
ready for being included in things like the KDE Flatpak runtime [1].

> what sort of development do you see likely to occur, should it move under
> the KDE umbrella instead

I'm particularly interested in adding Qt 6 support, and adding a cmake 
buildsystem. The current qmake buildsystem assumes that the module is 
going to be installed to the same prefix as the Qt install, which isn't 
true for flatpak apps for example.

> out of curiosity, why could that development
> not occur under the Qt project?

I don't think there is anything wrong with developing it under the Qt 
project, but just in case KDE would end up being the only party working 
on it, developing on KDE infrastructure would be the easiest for me. 
Also getting it released is something that would be easily possible 
without it becoming part of the official Qt releases.

Kind regards,


[1] https://invent.kde.org/packaging/flatpak-kde-runtime/-/issues/18

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_0xA81E075ABEC80A7E.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 11172 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP public key
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20210427/0242bdaa/attachment-0001.key>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 840 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20210427/0242bdaa/attachment-0001.sig>

More information about the Development mailing list