Sorry, both are dead: qt4 and that patch. I can't understand your
arguments, why can't you include that patch into qt4? I don't even mean
sni-qt, but please apply patch that will make possible to use sni-qt. Most
of people are able to compile sni-qt by theirself (or risk and install
ubuntu deb). This patch is quite small and should not break stability.
I understand you principles, but this case is huge usability issue. Too
huge to be able to be accepted.
On Sun, 26 Jul 2015 10:52:13 -0300 "Lisandro
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dami=E1n_Nicanor_P=E9rez?= Meyer" wrote:
> On Sunday 26 July 2015 12:42:56 MichaÅ Milanowski wrote:
> > Can't any debian dev see his stupidity regarding to this issue?
There
are
> > tons of qt4 apps that are widely used and will be probably never
ported to
> > qt5, like Skype for example, but many others too.
>
> Hi! I'm the Qt maintainer, and yes, I understand your arguments, but
again: do
> you really want to push dead-upstream code and support it trough the
whole
> life of Stretch? I don't.
>
> > You decided to drop support for them just like that (90% actually
used
> > linux apps) and you are providing the only solution "Port your app
to
qt5".
>
> Or someone to step up and become a sni-qt upstream, fix it's bugs and
we
can
> reconsider.
>
> > All workarounds decrived here look like a joke, not real solution.
>
> Yes, sadly they failed to me too :(
>
> > Ubuntu provided this patch, Arch provided too. Every known distro
has
> > workaround built in by patching qt to make their users live easier.
But not
> > Debian.
>
> For the reasons I have already stated.
>
> > Shame and f.... you (sorry!).
>
> That was definitely too much. Please refrain from that kind of
comments
in the
> future.
>
> --
>
> Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
> http://perezmeyer.com.ar/
> http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/
