[Interest] the path forward - that 7 year thing - was, , willy-nilly
roland at logikalsolutions.com
Thu Apr 1 11:55:52 CEST 2021
On 4/1/21 12:40 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Sunday, 28 March 2021 04:54:56 PDT Roland Hughes wrote:
>> What is "the process" criteria for new major version number? I'm
>> curious. Why? Because I agree with Scott. Extinction of platforms needs
>> to be a mandating force.
> The new major version happens when we need to do a binary compatibility break.
> Until that is necessary, we will not make a new major version.
> Dropping old platforms has been done since the early 2000s. Everyone who
> adopted Qt since 3.0 has known of this. It's was not news then and it's not
It is news now.
During Qt 3.x there were only a few customers, OS/2, and the KDE desktop
on fledgling Linux distros.
Since then, Qt actively pursued the medical device and industrial
controls markets. Currently it appears QtC is pursing the automotive
market to the exclusion of all else. Despite someone ranting and calling
that hearsay that's exactly what it looks like to the customers in the
When Qt pursued and penetrated these other markets it had to adjust to
the time lines of those markets. These are very long timelines. Fifteen
years on average.
Had Qt only pursued the phone and auto markets, it could have continued
on its merry way dropping things whenever the mood struck. The phone and
auto markets have about a six month life span before everything is
abandoned for the next platform.
They didn't. The medical device and industrial controls had the deeper
pockets. The means the policies and practices of the Qt project must
adapt to the market it pursued.
Roland Hughes, President
More information about the Interest