On Friday, 17 May 2019 09:38:05 PDT Marco Bubke wrote: > Thiago, you partially implying that BC is still needed but with technologies > like flatpak or snappy this will maybe not common use case anymore. They > provide even behaviour compatibility if you stay with the same runtime. > Something which is not provided by binary compability. I personally think > if the behaviour is changed it should not even compile anymore so you can > fix it easily.
Some level of compatibility is of course required, unless you're proposing we provide a certain level of bugfixing for ALL releases for a number of years. That is, if 6.2 isn't source-compatible with 6.1, then 6.1 needs to be supported for 3+ years with bugfixes for code that was ported to 6.1 but hasn't been ported further to 6.2. If we're still keeping source compatibility but not binary, the problem is not as big as above. But it still exists if you're not in a position to recompile all modules (think third party's component). -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel System Software Products _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
