On 04/22/2015 09:54 PM, André Pönitz wrote: > However, we do have context here, namely existing behaviour in Qt 5.x, > as well as certain general promises given for changes between Qt 5.x and > Qt 5.(x+1).
I see it as a long standing bug which finally got fixed. But the problem is that the behavioural change is already out there, with Qt 5.4. I think it would be easier to have a runtime check on the QT version (and eventually drop the local workarounds) than to introduce another behavioural change in the next Qt version. > Even though "no behaviour change" isn't one of the guarantees, I don't > think rotating part of an application's GUI by 90 degrees behind the > developer's back is acceptable. It's very unlikely that such images are used as part of the GUI. But I'm nitpicking, I certainly agree with you that the behavioural change is a major annoyance. However, if application developers had filed this bug earlier, instead of silently working around it in their application, we wouldn't even be discussing this. So, in a way, I believe that if this behavioural change affects someone in a bad way, some part of the blame falls on his side too. > If an application accepts such change it should announce it by explicitly > opting in, i.e. by setting a flag/calling a function/whatever. Actually, this sounds like a very good idea; I wouldn't mind if this was a opt-in, as long as the behaviour was configurable with a single line change (a static method on QGuiApplication, maybe?). As long as I don't have to change it in every single QImage/QML Image, all is fine to me. Ciao, Alberto _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development