On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 4:39 PM Damien Goutte-Gattat via Gnupg-devel
<email@example.com> wrote: >
> On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 10:55:34AM +0200, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> >I'm currently working on (usability) improvements for pinentry-qt and
> >I'm wondering whether pinentry-qt still needs to build with Qt4 or
> >whether we can drop support for Qt4
> For what it’s worth , my take on this is that by now support for Qt4
> should be on a "best-effort" basis. That is, as long as continuing to
> support Qt4 is not too much of a hassle, we might as well do it, but if
> it becomes a burden (and, in particular, if it starts to get in the way
> of usability improvements), I wouldn't have too many qualms about
> dropping it.
> (The only GNU/Linux distribution I know of that still does not provide
> Qt5 is the last release of Slackware (14.2, released in 2016), and even
> though I am a proud Slacker, I wouldn’t be too concerned about it. Many
> Slackers use -current (where Qt5 is available), and for those that still
> use 14.2, they have other problems – such as the fact that they are
> basically stuck with GnuPG 2.0…)
Another data point... CentOS 7 (and probably Red Hat) provides Qt3 and
Qt5. CentOS6 provides Qt3.
CentOS6 is still used in the field. I saw a bug report on it a couple
of months ago.
I'm not a fan of Red Hat's model. But the reality of it is, you are
going to see older versions of some packages.
Gnupg-devel mailing list