On Thursday, 24 October 2019 16:41:58 CEST David Faure wrote: > On jeudi 24 octobre 2019 16:32:32 CEST Volker Krause wrote: > > Maybe we should look at this separately for stable branches and master? > > Makes sense for Applications (assuming we lower down from 0x060000 to > latest- tested when master itself is branched into a stable branch).
Exactly. > No such separation in KF5 itself though, there the question remains. > But we have the task in our KF6 dashboard, so hopefully we won't forget to > regularly increase the number and fix compilation. We as in, any KF6 > volunteer, not necessarily Laurent. There's two things to look at for Frameworks I think: - Qt: only two more version updates remaining for 5, or at most two per year. Doing this as an explicit/script-assisted bump is probably acceptable, and to to be sure we don't forget this it could maybe automatically be determined as max(explicitly deprecated qt version, minimum required qt version). - other KF5 dependencies: it might be worth setting this to the current KF5 version. At least at the point where we are deprecated-clean once, and accept a deprecation policy that requires Frameworks to be ported before the deprecation is executed. In such a scenario this would never trigger, but provide a safe guard we follow our own rules. Regards, Volker
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
