> Would it maybe make things a bit easier to leave the whole MacOS > business aside and take care of the Linux-specific stuff first?
Linux is not really causing us any specific problems. Packaging is a lot easier, thanks to Linux distributions and Flatpak. The only wrinkle is the oddities on Wayland that are related to Qt 5. > And what actually about Windows - out of curiosity. Windows is… a can of worms of its own. The Windows installers for the past few releases were built by a user (@19joho66 on GitHub) who apparently manages to them work by moving shared libraries around manually :-( > I myself am a Linux user (Mint), and so far Frescobaldi is still running > flawlessly. > And - another question out of curiosity: Could it be a workaround (if > Qt5 would be officially retired and no longer be available in the repos > of the "big" distros like Mint, Ubuntu and the like) if one used a > distro for older computers which might stick to Qt5 much longer? I may be wrong, but I don't really foresee distros retiring Qt 5 soon since Frescobaldi should not be the only piece of software still requiring it (as Qt is so widely used). In any case, the Flatpak package can still ship it. What's more likely to happen is that changes in the desktop environments (like Xorg → Wayland) make Qt 5 work less and less well.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
