This would be the same as dropping the Windows Embedded Compact support. So its a clear no from my side.
-- Björn Breitmeyer | bjoern.breitme...@kdab.com | Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH&Co KG, a KDAB Group company Germany: +49-30-521325470, Sweden (HQ): +46-563-540090 KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-independent software solutions Am Donnerstag, 5. Februar 2015, 09:07:12 schrieb Henry Skoglund: > +1 for dropping VS2008. For those with thin wallets it's easier to > upgrade nowadays anyway to the VS2013 Community Edition. > > /Rgrds Henry > > On 2015-02-05 08:31, Bo Thorsen wrote: > > Den 04-02-2015 kl. 15:56 skrev Olivier Goffart: > >> On Wednesday 04 February 2015 09:23:12 Knoll Lars wrote: > >>> On 04/02/15 10:20, "Olivier Goffart" <oliv...@woboq.com> wrote: > >>>> Also, is it not time to decide which platform are we going to stop > >>>> supporting in Qt 5.6? > >>>> > >>>> For example, if we were to decide to start using some of the C++11, we > >>>> should drop MSVC 2008 which would allow us to already use things like > >>>> auto > >>>> and decltype. > >>>> We could also drop gcc 4.4 which would let us lambda function. > >>> > >>> In principle I agree. The problem with 2008 is that this is currently > >>> the > >>> only compiler supporting Windows Embedded 7, so we can’t easily get rid > >>> of > >>> it. Dropping gcc 4.4 is afaik not a big problem. > >> > >> The question then is how relevant will Windows Embedded 7 be in 2016 when > >> Qt 5.6 will be there. And if it is worth to limit ourselves because of > >> it.> > > Sounds to me like 5.5 will be a release that will be around for a while > > then. This could be the one where those who need webkit, VS 2008 og Qt > > Quick 1 would use. So declaring support for this will continue for a > > while could make it easier to remove those parts. > > > > If this could be the case, it could even be considered to go even > > further and get rid of more stuff. VS 2010 would be one possibility. I'm > > writing this with VS 2010 open for the project I'm currently on, so I > > know it's still in use :) But getting rid of this opens for a lot more > > C++11 features. > > > > What I'm suggesting here is sort of a mini major release. It doesn't > > feel like a 6.0 is necessary yet, but as the 5 line is mayby around half > > through it's life, it might not be a bad idea to make a longer term > > release. > > > > Bo. > > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development