Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Qt 5.15 Released With Graphics Improvements, Preparations Ahead Of Qt 6

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by ddriver View Post

    6 will bring major changes that will require a lot of time and effort to accommodate. 5.15 is an LTS version, so it is not the worst place to get stuck for a while... or forever in some cases. The community is not exactly thrilled by the qt management...
    The LTS updates from 5.15 onward will not be free, 5.15 will be like a normal update for us. But I do agree with your first point. We will likely see 5.15 packaged alongside version 6 in the future, just like how we have 4 and 5 now. But it'll be up to the community to back-port fixes this time.
    Last edited by board; 26 May 2020, 04:22 PM.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by board View Post

      The LTS updates from 5.15 onward will not be free. But I do agree with your first point. We will likely see 5.15 packaged alongside version 6 in the future, just like how we have 4 and 5 now. But it'll be up to the community to back-port fixes this time.
      From your link:
      Starting with Qt 5.15, long term support (LTS) will only be available to commercial customers. This means open-source users will receive patch-level releases of 5.15 until the next minor release will become available. This means that we will handle Qt 5.15 in the same way as e.g. 5.13 or 5.14 for open source users.
      That means 5.15 will be available as usual, but it won't receive public patches once the next version (probably 6.0 in this case) is released.

      Lo and behold, 5.15 is actually available: https://www.qt.io/offline-installers

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by bug77 View Post

        From your link:


        That means 5.15 will be available as usual, but it won't receive public patches once the next version (probably 6.0 in this case) is released.

        Lo and behold, 5.15 is actually available: https://www.qt.io/offline-installers
        Yes, I noticed earlier that my post initially could've caused a misunderstanding. I've already edited it to clarify that it's a normal update for us.

        But thank you for pointing it out regardless.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by bug77 View Post
          That means 5.15 will be available as usual, but it won't receive public patches once the next version (probably 6.0 in this case) is released.
          Actually I would not be so sure about that. They explicitely write, "This means open-source users will receive patch-level releases of 5.15 until the next minor release will become available," and 6.0 ist not a minor release. It also does not qualify as a direct replacement of a minor release because it is breaking compatibility.

          As right now there are no plans for another 5.x release, I would expect 5.15 to stay the last minor release of the 5 series with indefinite patches ;-)

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by ypnos View Post

            Actually I would not be so sure about that. They explicitely write, "This means open-source users will receive patch-level releases of 5.15 until the next minor release will become available," and 6.0 ist not a minor release. It also does not qualify as a direct replacement of a minor release because it is breaking compatibility.

            As right now there are no plans for another 5.x release, I would expect 5.15 to stay the last minor release of the 5 series with indefinite patches ;-)
            It could be, I'm not big on legalese
            Tbh, users of rolling releases jump on the latest Qt release every time. They did not benefit from LTS support anyway. This will hurt conservative distros, but the silver lining could be they are now pushed towards shipping more recent Qt versions; users win by getting more up to date packages, Qt Company wins by getting more feedback on their changes.
            Not a win-win, losing support is always a bummer. But if Qt Company needed to cash in on something, this may be the most harmless way of doing that.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by bug77 View Post
              It could be, I'm not big on legalese
              "We" will all know the truth sometime after Qt 6.0 ships (and not before), since the wording is quite intentionally part of the spin zone.

              Tbh, users of rolling releases jump on the latest Qt release every time. They did not benefit from LTS support anyway.
              Well, for minor releases, sure. But just as Qt 4 (last) is still shipped by many distros, Qt 5 (last) will be shipped by many (including rolling) releases long after Qt 6 is available as it is unlikely that there will not be some incompatible change between Qt 5 (last) and QT 6 (first) that some independent projects are not yet ready to embrace. Having done just a very small part of the uplift from Qt 4 to Qt 5 in a larger OSS project I recognize that sometimes it is easy, but there are places where it is not, and testing on multiple Qt versions is not at all trivial.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by bug77 View Post

                It could be, I'm not big on legalese
                Tbh, users of rolling releases jump on the latest Qt release every time. They did not benefit from LTS support anyway. This will hurt conservative distros, but the silver lining could be they are now pushed towards shipping more recent Qt versions; users win by getting more up to date packages, Qt Company wins by getting more feedback on their changes.
                Not a win-win, losing support is always a bummer. But if Qt Company needed to cash in on something, this may be the most harmless way of doing that.
                I think that their approach is flawed. I agree that they need to cash in, but that's an ugly way to do it.
                Usually if you want more people use your paid tiers you add something that's worth buying, you don't take away stuff from the free tier...

                Comment


                • #28
                  No pre-built offline installers sure, although I wouldn't say that I am going to miss those. Especially not since they moved everything into one installer, I really only use the GCC version, so it is kinda pointless to download a binary that contains a multitude of versions just to get one.

                  On the upside, you can still get pre-built with the online installer, and qt installations are supposed to be portable now, although I haven't tested it yet, so technically you should be able to use the online installer to download whatever you want, and then simply store that as a portable installation and copy it to other systems, so you don't even need to go through the installation step, as long as the installation is portable, that's actually better than the slow and bloated offline installer.

                  Lastly, building qt yourself is fairly trivial and there are a lot of good reasons to do your custom configured build.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by 144Hz View Post
                    Congratulations to the Qt Marketing Dept. Boiling a frog is a difficult scam that requires expert weasel tactics. “Who needs seat belts or LTS anyway?”
                    look who's come out of the cave. do you have a generator for your posts or you actually take time to write the same thing over and over again?

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by JackLilhammers View Post

                      I think that their approach is flawed. I agree that they need to cash in, but that's an ugly way to do it.
                      Usually if you want more people use your paid tiers you add something that's worth buying, you don't take away stuff from the free tier...
                      Sure, that's how it's usually done. But then there'd be some functionality the users of the free version don't get. Imho, no patches past a certain point is less harmful. But then there's the valid point CommunityMember raised.
                      What can I say, ideally Qt Company would be swimming in $$$ and wouldn't do this at all. Since that's seemingly not the case, there's little we can do, but wait and see how it plays out. Qt's past has always been rocky, yet Qt is still with us. Have a little faith

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X