On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 05:51:30PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 16/11/2022 à 17:11, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 02:37:18PM +0100, Thibaut Cuvelier wrote: > > > > > Well, if barely anyone tests with Qt 4 (I'm only using Qt 5.15), it's > > > already unsupported in practice and making the necessary changes would be > > > (1) cumbersome and (2) a waste of resources (little gain in supporting > > > versions of software that only belongs to a museum -- it's not as old as > > > 486 > > > <https://www.phoronix.com/news/Intel-i486-Linux-Possible-Drop>, though). > > > > Thanks, Thibaut. Does anyone object then to supporting only Qt5 for > > 2.4.0 (and forward)? > > I won't object. Does this mean that we shall remove now all the #ifdef > pertaining to Qt4?
I don't know. What do others think? Do we go all-in and drop Qt4 and do all the clean up now to simplify the code? That would indeed feel nice. Or do we leave it as is, and just officially not support Qt4, so that if some (from what I understand, theoretical) person really wants to compile with Qt4, with some hacks to the current code they might have a chance? Scott
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- lyx-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-devel
