On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 12:41 PM Nicolás Alvarez <nicolas.alva...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > El 27 mar. 2021, a la(s) 12:30, Fabian Vogt <fab...@ritter-vogt.de> > > escribió: > > Moin, > > > > Am Samstag, 27. M?rz 2021, 14:11:38 CET schrieb David Faure: > >>>>> On samedi 27 mars 2021 12:51:37 CET Kai Uwe Broulik wrote: > >>>> Hi everyone, > >>>> during the ongoing KDE Frameworks 6 sprint we were just contemplating > >>>> whether we can bump the required Qt dependency for Frameworks 5 to Qt > >>>> 5.15. > >>>> Reason being that Qt 5.15 includes a set of porting aids and > >>>> forward-compatibility with Qt 6, such as version-less "Qt" rather than > >>>> "Qt5" CMake target, various QStringView-related features, and so on. > >>>> We would like to start working on KDE Frameworks 6 on Qt 6 but still > >>>> keep Frameworks 5 supported with as little overhead as possible, i.e. > >>>> not having a gazillion ifdefs or even dedicated branch, which we would > >>>> likely need, should we have to continue supporting Qt 5.14 in the > >>>> process. > >>>> Are there any objections or concerns or potential release schedule > >>>> conflicts if we did that? > >> While at it, can we also get your feedback on > >> * Requiring C++17 > > > > Which for GCC means at least g++ 9 in practice due to std::filesystem? > > I think we need to be more specific and say what is the minimum compiler > version. Maybe we can set g++8 as the minimum and use C++17 language features > while avoiding std::filesystem. > > But only if someone actually cares about keeping gcc8 support :) >
I don't, not even for RHEL/CentOS 8 where GCC 8 is the default compiler. We can easily use GCC 10. I like std::filesystem too much to say no to it. :) -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
