On martes, 14 de febrero de 2023 19:28:53 -03 Soren Stoutner wrote: > Which part do you not understand about not being needed on both Qt 5 and Qt > 6? The part about building the .bdic files or the part about Qt WebEngine > using the .bdic files at runtime?
Sorry, wrong question on my side. I just went trough the whole thread. I understand that these bdic files are needed for packages that use Qt[5 6]webengine. But I do not like the idea of **other** packages making use of them. Let me explain you why: - webengine is the most complicated package we handle, it is the very example of a PITA. It embeds the world, it takes ages to compile, it has weird errors... - Hunspell dictionaries should be handled by... hunspell. Yes, I know this was considered and it's still not possible. But the fact that webengine ships them is not enough a reason to expose them to the world instead of doing the right thing: handling them there. - They are not built by default by Qt itself. This is weird... or they do not want to handle possible build errors. Should we Qt maintainers? No. - If the patches are taken and at some point webengine upstreams decide to switch to something else then we the Qt maintainers get the broken pieces. Insta RC bugs, we get this package stopped from migrating to testing until solving the issue... a pain. So no, I'm totally against these change. Dmitry, Patrick: my suggestion is to reverse the patches. -- https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
