[Interest] The willy-nilly deletion of convenience,, methods

[Scott Bloom]

-----Original Message-----
From: Interest <interest-bounces at qt-project.org> On Behalf Of Thiago Macieira
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2021 15:44
To: interest at qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Interest] The willy-nilly deletion of convenience,, methods

On Wednesday, 24 March 2021 04:48:08 PDT Roland Hughes wrote:
> On 3/24/21 6:00 AM, interest-request at qt-project.org wrote:
> > The exact opposite is the correct thing:
> >   - deprecation messages while compiling the source code are correct
> >   - messages to the mailing list are not sufficient
> 
> No, it's not. It only seems correct if you live in a world where 
> nothing lasts six months.
> 
> Out in the real product world you create some product using Qt 3.x or 
> 4.2. That product goes to production where it remains for 7-15+ years.

I stand by what I said and I live in the real world. You clearly live in a different, also real world. I don't doubt any of the claims you make are true. 
I do doubt that they are the majority or even significant. The majority of the uses I am familiar with last much shorter than 7 years. At the very least, there are opportunities in those 7 years to do incremental progress or keep up with the latest.

Qt's horizon is about 7 years.

Anything coded to Qt 3.x needs to ported first to 4.8, before going to 5.0. 
Once you're in the 5.x series, port to 5.15 and fix the warnings. Once you're clean in a working build, port to Qt 6.
======================

Hard failure here.  Because Qt decided to change the list of supported compilers and OSes in the Qt 5 timeframe, (another major problem with the Qt universe), I know of many companies stuck at 5.12.  BTW, that includes Intel on two projects I know of 😊

I have customers who REQUIRE (as in I don’t have a choice) using CentOS 6.  We tried and failed to back port 5.15 to it.

So we are effectively stuck at 5.12 until our customer allows us to drop CentOS/RHEL 6.0

And yes, we know 6.0 has been end of life'd, is insecure, has problems etc etc.. You tell them, well just enter the modern world, stop developing billion dollar systems by choosing an OS to start with and not allowing major OS changes until the version the team is working on is finished.

And while you are at it, convince the intel internal rtl lint team to do the same.

Scott