Literally this whole thing could be: "we're making a cheaper offering for small teams" and see where it goes. Instead it's one wholesome "**** you!" package to the community at large.
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 7:55 PM Florian Bruhin <m...@the-compiler.org> wrote: > Hey, > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 04:00:48PM +0000, Tuukka Turunen wrote: > > After the change every release of Qt will look like a non-lts release for > > open-source users. Think of Qt 5.14 as an example. It was released in > > December. Today it received the first patch release. There will be more > > before next feature release is out. For open-source user Qt 5.15 will > look > > just like Qt 5.14 does. > > Except that the next release after Qt 5.15 won't be 5.16 but Qt 6. > > How does the transition story for open source projects look there? If the > (security) support for Qt 5.15 is dropped as soon as Qt 6 is released, does > that mean projects would have to migrate immediately? What if they are > using > third-party libraries which need to be migrated first? > > I'm aware that Qt 5 -> Qt 6 is supposed to be a manageable change (and > smaller > than 3 -> 4 or 4 -> 5). But still, expecting projects to essentially have > migrated before Qt 6 is released isn't exactly realistic... > > Am I missing something there? > > Florian > > -- > m...@the-compiler.org (Mail/XMPP) | https://www.qutebrowser.org > https://bruhin.software/ | > https://github.com/sponsors/The-Compiler/ > GPG: 916E B0C8 FD55 A072 | https://the-compiler.org/pubkey.asc > I love long mails! | https://email.is-not-s.ms/ > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development >
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development