Qt 6.2 Alpha Released With Many More Modules Ported From Qt5

[bug77]

Considering how much of the modules and features were missing, it can hardly be taken as a production ready version. It doesn't really matter if they deemed what's in as production ready, when the problem lies in what is missing. It is really more of a demo, regardless of whether it is released as beta or final...

They ABSOLUTELY released 6 and 6.1 for the community to do testing, something they don't appear to be emphasizing on enough. And unfortunately, being negligent at testing doesn't seem to be the product of prioritizing known bug fixes.

But don't take my word for it, even their blog post admits that it only now has feature parity with 5... Almost... But at least enough to be considered mostly useful for actual production.

Not being feature complete in this case has nothing to do with being production ready. Granted, many of the missing modules were rather popular, making Qt 6.0 and 6.1 a no go for many projects, but considering Qt is used all over the place, I bet there's a number of projects that could (and probably did) go ahead using those versions.
In fact that was the whole reasoning: instead of releasing all modules in beta shape, they chose to release fewer modules in production ready shape. You may or may not like that (personally, I think it feels right, but it was done at the worst possible time), but it still has nothing to do with production readiness.

Are we done splitting hairs now?

[Vistaus]

Please stop referring to any release of Qt as Long Term Support releases. They are no such thing. LTS is only for their paying customers, which by definition should already have support.

You are buying into and perpetuating the big lie that Qt Company provides any kind of stable platform for open source development. It is a constantly moving target.

So all the distros using Qt 5.15.2 LTS are paying for support then?

[Mark625]

So all the distros using Qt 5.15.2 LTS are paying for support then?

I think you misunderstand the situation due to the "LTS" misnomer, which is my exact point. Qt 5.15.2 LTS is no longer supported for open source projects, it is frozen. There will be no 5.15.3 release. There will be no 5.16 release. There are no more official bug fixes or security fixes from Qt Company for any Qt 5 release, they are only released to paying customers under contract. Qt 5 as open source is dead unless someone wants to fork it.

That's why continuing to call any Qt release "LTS" is wrong, at least for open source users.

[ddriver]

Are we done splitting hairs now?

Practice takes precedence to theory. They have the authority to label it "production ready" as much as they have authority to label it "ice cream sundae". But in the end of the day, whether or not it is a viable production grade framework depends on whether you can retarget your code base against it or not.

[Nth_man]

What's "fake" is 144Hz and his fake accounts: 144Hz, GhostOfFunkS, Funkstar, Griffin, Honton, etc. As soon as his account is banned, he starts with another fake one.

[bug77]

Practice takes precedence to theory. They have the authority to label it "production ready" as much as they have authority to label it "ice cream sundae". But in the end of the day, whether or not it is a viable production grade framework depends on whether you can retarget your code base against it or not.

Correct. As long as your project doesn't use any of the missing modules, you can retarget.

[Nth_man]

Qt 5.15.2 LTS is no longer supported for open source projects, it is frozen. There will be no 5.15.3 release. There will be no 5.16 release. There are no more official bug fixes or security fixes from Qt Company

The Qt Company will bring security fixes for past branches of Qt. Distros also apply KDE's Qt5 Patch Collection. The latest Qt version will get all the fixes.

As a Qt and Intel developer [wrote](https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-c.../006679.html):
Let me be very clear so there's no mistake: all security issues will be dealt
with in all branches, to the extent that we are able to reproduce them and
confirm them. We usually identify down to the point release where security
issues apply and will continue to do so.
-- Thiago Macieira