> On 15 Jun 2026, at 13:01, Ivan Solovev <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> the patches are approved for a couple of weeks as of now.
> Can we proceed with merging them?
> 
> Best regards,
> Ivan


Yes please.

Volker


> _____________________________
> From: Development <[email protected]> on behalf of Scott 
> Bloom <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2026 8:17 PM
> To: Volker Hilsheimer; Macieira, Thiago
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Development] Either remove or make QZip{Reader, Writer} official
> 
>> On 28 May 2026, at 02:47, Thiago Macieira <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> On Wednesday, 27 May 2026 15:55:39 Pacific Daylight Time Ville
>> Voutilainen
>> wrote:
>>>> It would be preferable to have a replacement than not, but it will
>>>> depend on there being a volunteer or two to write it.
>>> 
>>> How does the suggested removal work, when it breaks
>>> 
>>>> QZipWriter is used inside of Qt, in the ODF file exporter in QtGui
>>> 
>>> ?
>> 
>> QZipWriter is moved into QtGui and unexported:
>> https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtbase/+/737152
> 
> 
> I have approved the removal and move. This functionality is not something 
> that has to be part of Qt, much less Qt Core. This has kitchen sink (and bit 
> rot) written all over it, making it more a liability than anything else.
> 
> Scott, appreciate you volunteering; I think you and others will find that 
> using a dedicated and actively maintained library will bring you more joy, 
> and certainly more security. That said, feel free to take the code from Qt 
> and compile it into your own application. And if anyone wants to implement a 
> Qt library for handling archives and Microsoft ***x files etc, then go ahead, 
> of course. But it won’t be in Core, and probably doesn’t even have to be part 
> of a Qt distribution that has to provide an increasingly substantial set of 
> cyber-security guarantees to users.
> 
> Volker
> 
> --
> Understood.  Ive effectively done that, since I think I first used it in Qt4 
> days and have extended the API for ease of use.
> 
> So each time I update to a new version of Qt, I merge changes into my API 
> based code.  Luckily it hasn’t changed much 😊
> 
> This brings up something else that might be interesting to explore.  What if 
> Qt officially had an "extensions" repository of some sort.  Where developers 
> could easily go to, to search for add ons in a similar fashion to the Zip 
> support, but would need to provide certain base functionality for use 
> controlled and mandated by the Qt project?  Ie simply cmake integration would 
> be a requirement.
> 
> If it already exists, I have never found one 😊
> 
> It would be interesting, if it could be developed in a fashion that would 
> allow an online installer/setup that would be dynamically updated with what 
> is on the server.   Im thinking in a similar style to how Cygwin is 
> distributed.
> 
> Scott
> 
> 
> --
> Development mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

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

Reply via email to