On Jan 21, 2014, at 7:36 AM, Sorvig Morten <morten.sor...@digia.com> wrote:
> On 21 Jan 2014, at 11:51, Simon Hausmann <simon.hausm...@digia.com> wrote:
>
> That depends on how much time we spend releasing Qt :)
>
> I realize that if I’m the only one who want’s to keep supporting 10.6 then
> that’s not going to work. The most important thing to me is to have a
> somewhat predictable deprecation plan. For example (and at the risk of making
> this example “the plan”):
>
> 5.3 - Remove support from binary packages.
> 5.4 - 10.6 support is deprecated.
> 5.5? - Remove support.
I think this is relatively reasonable. By 5.5 (mid-2015, right?) we will have
or almost have OS X 10.11 which is three versions into the OS X free pricing
model. Given the fast uptake of OS X Mavericks in just a few short months, by
then it seems to me that it will be the ideal time to say goodbye to the last
of the Leopards. The gap between Snow Leopard and Lion is also probably the
most technically significant between any two recent versions of OS X, so when
it's 10.7's time to go we may not even need any code changes.
Also, keep in mind that ARC requires the Objective-C Modern Runtime i.e.
dropping support for 32-bit 100% (ARC + 32-bit = compile error). Despite us not
currently providing any 32-bit packages, the CI system still has at least one
32-bit configuration if I remember correctly. So, if there are any use cases
for a 32-bit build of Qt on modern versions of OS X, let's keep that in mind
before moving to ARC.
>
> Now you could argue that “deployment only” is de facto “deprecated”, but I
> think we should explicitly state it. Also, some time need to pass between
> “deprecated” and code removal, we can’t deprecate in 5.4 and then remove the
> code in dev the day after the release.
>
> This thread should then be titled “Deprecate Mac OS 10.6 Build?”. The
> arguments for are:
> - Parts of the dev team do not want to maintain it
> - We want to free up CI resources
> - Questionable install base size
>
> Sending a loud and clear “deprecated” message could actually help clear up
> that last point.
>
> Morten
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development@qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
--
Jake Petroules
Chief Technology Officer
Petroules Corporation · www.petroules.com
Email: jake.petrou...@petroules.com
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
