-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 12/29/2015 03:52 PM, Raoul Snyman wrote:
> On 28/12/2015 10:33, Tomas Groth wrote:
>> Therefore I propose that we postpone any effort to move to
>> QtWebEngine for now. While being stuck on QtWebkit isn't a great
>> option either, for now it seems to be the only option we have...
> 
> Thanks for your thorough research, Tomas. I agree that we're going
> to have to postpone the move to QtWebEngine.
> 
> Fortunately, neither the up-coming Fedora, nor the up-coming
> Ubuntu releases will have Qt 5.6, so we're safe for now. I think
> the only platform that will have a problem will be Arch, because of
> their aggressive upgrade cycle, but there's nothing we can do about
> that (except for some sort of packaging magic?).
> 

I'm the current packager for arch.
I don't think arch will move to qt5.6 until at least kde update their
stuff. However I don't know what their plan is.
I'll go ask the maintainer of qt about upgrade plans.
I don't think I'm capable of packaging magic yet...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJWgsNXAAoJENJkb4Sw+v4XNzIIAKEnh6Rlh4Dc39RhUZq12nTL
+QBFxlwU6WAh1MAl5EQGP4vKhGdSWTDYUHMjDNy4ApA9frLaPsvXmZaFhH4rZBaB
bvhI6Fpav9xEfND7g7mz9nigloFq1Ex3SNa1beWvm+1uyjuyTDjf3Wi1S6J4lBs3
SMEAg0pBsTlQqm+jRg9DAqZ9u0vkPlJw4h2E0BOtoh9LfY5cD79iQb+haA8YuI9u
wPigiWfg8YqS4jUS6Yq68GnQbvahJyR+uXH/g4K/SM7MFpgDshZDV6VJ34WG0bbv
s7Mjhq1fchRR6Y9RFbbO1zkx8nGbE5r41hlpg5wtFTlTHETlsrDr6OrbzEfxzdo=
=wdBq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
openlp-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openlp.io/mailman/listinfo/openlp-dev

Reply via email to