> Nyall Dawson <nyall.daw...@gmail.com> writes: > >> On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 at 10:48, Greg Troxel via QGIS-Developer < >> qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >> >>> I wonder about "less stable" qt5 and "more stable" qt6. Do we really >>> believe that qgis built on qt6, with no plugins will have fewer crashes >>> and quirks, than the qt5 build? >> >> Yes, I do. Because Qt 5 is not improving any more, but Qt 6 is. An example >> would be when running under Wayland environments on linux -- it's a very >> broken mess on Qt 5 and will never be fixed. On Qt 6 it's only a >> slightly-broken mess, and will likely be non-broken within the next 12 >> months. There's a similar situation for apple processors, which never had >> full official support on Qt 5 but ARE fully supported on Qt 6. This gap is >> only getting wider as newer operating system updates and corresponding >> changes break things underneath Qt 5. > >> There's also a limited stream of bug fixes getting ported back to Qt 5.15, >> vs those flowing into the supported Qt 6 releases. > > That's a good argument. I have not really dealt with qt6 yet, and my > impression has been that qt5 is quite stable on my platform (which never > had any official support). But upstream's maintenenance policies are > troubling. > >>> That is surprising to me at this point. >>> Do we still believe that if one assumes "qgis with N random plugins that >>> claim to support qt6"? >> >> (Well, QGIS + **ANY** plugin = a less stable QGIS. 🤣 But that's a >> completely different point) > > of course. I just meant that stability(qgis-only) could have a > different answer than stability(qgis+p1+p7), where p7 not working with > qt6 leads to a 0 score on the stability metric. > >>> I expect a qt6 build is kind of like a .0 release, and we would want to >>> have qt6 builds widel avaialable and time for feedback before saying >>> it's stable. >> >> I'd say we're well past the ".0" stage of Qt 6 support. Almost all the core >> functionality is quite well tested at this stage, and third party clients >> (like Mergin and QField) switched to Qt 6 based QGIS builds earlier this >> year. I'm confident that by the time we hit a (potential) October 2025 >> milestone that we'll have a very stable Qt 6 build available. > > My experience (not in qgis) is that broad releases often uncover > problems not hit by testing with less scope. Maybe there won't be much > or perhaps even any, but until the broader qgis world, on varying > systems. > > Therefore I think it would be good to start offering qt6 builds on the > website before then, at least by July, to let a larger pool of users try > them, marked "for testing" and then the labels can flip to "for use with > old plugins"/"recommended". >
Agreed, If we were to propose the 2 versions (Qt5 and Qt6) side by side, we should propose the Qt 6 version for download sooner than october. Why not 3.42 in february? > > I will see about making the pkgsrc package have an option for which qt > flavor, so I can test too. > _______________________________________________ > QGIS-Developer mailing list > QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer -- Julien Cabieces Senior Developer at Oslandia julien.cabie...@oslandia.com _______________________________________________ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
