> On 9 Nov 2020, at 19:27, Shawn Rutledge <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 2 Nov 2020, at 17:15, Thiago Macieira <[email protected]> wrote:
>> ]qml is like Python: because of plugins, it's tied to the Qt version. 
>> Therefore, it fails the requirement for supporting everything the old 
>> version 
>> supported. 
> 
> Well if you were using modules that are no longer supported, or you run into 
> some little incompatibility; but we have been trying to avoid API breaks.  
> QML files that begin with “import QtQuick 2.0” still work fine so far; also 
> Controls, Layouts etc.  So IMO it’s less onerous than the python upgrade.

… but your point was not about QML file compatibility but about the mere fact 
that we have a BC break, so users need two versions of the qml interpreter 
installed at the same time, right?  And I still rather like the idea of just 
installing them in different places, and having a symlink to point to the one 
you want to use.  If distro maintainers insist that /usr/bin/qml must be an 
executable and not a symlink, then I guess it should be the Qt 6 version, to go 
along with the fact that we’re pushing the open source community pretty hard to 
upgrade as soon as it’s released.  The Qt 5 version of qml can be hidden in 
another directory, because users who are developing new software presumably 
don’t need it too often anymore.  As for shebang scripts… I will admit that 
they are probably scarce, because we haven’t publicized this feature much.  And 
even if some people wrote them, many of those should still work.

_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Reply via email to