On Sun, Dec 28, 2025 at 11:20 AM Albert Astals Cid <[email protected]> wrote:

> El dissabte, 27 de desembre del 2025, a les 22:18:55 (Hora estàndard
> d’Europa
> central), Christoph Cullmann va escriure:
> > Hi,
> >
> > given we soon start 2026: Would it be time to sunset the Qt 5 stuff on
> > invent?
>
> In July we said it would be in September and there was not a huge uproar,
> so
> doing it in January 2026 (6 months later than what we said) should be more
> than enough.
>
> Doing it == "closing the remaining Qt5 CI" and that's it i guess?
>
> Or is there something else that needs to be removed?
>

We'd also stop tracking trunk_kf5 / stable_kf5 for translation purposes as
well?


>
> Cheers,
>   Albert


Cheers,
Ben


>
>
> >
> > (beside the Qt patch collection)
> >
> > Greetings
> > Christoph
> >
> > On Thursday, July 3rd, 2025 at 21:33, Albert Astals Cid <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > El dijous, 3 de juliol del 2025, a les 16:52:49 (Hora d’estiu d’Europa
> > >
> > > central), Neal Gompa va escriure:
> > > > On Sun, Jun 22, 2025 at 6:31 PM Albert Astals Cid [email protected]
> wrote:
> > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > While this has been discussed in various forums, it has not yet
> been
> > > > > the
> > > > > main focus of any conversation.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > We are planning to drop support for Qt5 CI on invent.kde.org at
> the
> > > > > end of
> > > > > September 2025.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > If you are still using Qt5 you have 3 months to move to Qt6 or you
> can
> > > > > try
> > > > > to convince the powers that you need more time with a really good
> > > > > reason.
> > > > > Does this mean we've effectively stopped working on the Qt5 patch
> > > > > collection and we're going to EOL the 24.08-qt5 runtime for
> Flatpak in
> > > > > September?
> > >
> > > We do not have CI for the patch collection.
> > >
> > >
> > > I will [try to[ continue doing the rebases for the patch-collection
> until
> > > Qt 5.15.19 gets released next year.
> > >
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Albert
>
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to