On December 21, 2015 09:18:29 PM Adam Majer wrote: > On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 08:49:34PM -0600, Steve M. Robbins wrote: > > I am aware of 5.x betas. I hesitate to use them right now because of the > > "beta" status. The announcement post itself  says "This version is for > > testing purposes. It’s not currently advised to use it in production." > > > > Maybe this is overcautious? Opinions welcome. > > I think this is overcautious. Qt 4 is to be removed from Debian so > removing dependencies on Qt 4 is preferred to adding new ones.
Well, yes: all things being equal, I'd agree it is folly to create new Qt4 packages. However, the question I am asking is about the quality of DigiKam "beta 5.x" vis-a-vis "stable 4.x". I don't know that these are equal in quality. The note from the DigiKam maintainers suggests they are not. -Steve
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.