Hi, On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 at 14:15, Rodney Dawes <dobey.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 2023-01-17 at 13:43 -0300, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer > wrote: > > Yes, but still not using Qt 6, so no need on our side to create more > > work for us while not yet there. It would be much much easier if they > > just used _stable_ API. And that's where we get back to upstream, > > plugins, etc. Create _stable_ API and everything goes smooth. > > Chicken, meet egg.
Yes :-) > It would be much easier if Qt didn't require using private API to do > anything useful at this level. But here we are. Exactly. > Of course maliit isn't using Qt6 *yet* because in trying to do so, I > came across this issue already reported in Debian, which I use as my > main platform, and which has never presented such problem when > developing these projects before. Had the necessary private development > files already been available, we wouldn't even be having this > discussion, and I would already have maliit-framework building on Qt6 > (not least because I'm pretty sure I already did have it building as a > quick experiment, but when revisiting this yesterday, discovered the > private portion of qt6-wayland had been removed). I can offer you two solutions: 1. Come aboard maintaining Qt 6. Once you get a pair of Qt upgrades and you want to support private headers for the whole of the Qt 6 lifetime, you are welcome to add them and support them. 2. Break the chicken and egg issue by building your own Qt. You can use the debian packages as a base. Cheers, Lisandro. -- Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer https://perezmeyer.com.ar/
