Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 2014-07-15, at 04:53 PM, Adam Light wrote: > Getting back to a thread from a few months ago > > > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 3:57 PM, Jake Petroules > wrote: > > Pretty much the only thing you lose with ARC is that it's 64-bit only and > thus using it means waving goodbye to 32-bit Qt on OS X completely. I don't > know if this is a problem for anyone. There's also a selection of classes to > which zeroing weak references cannot be made at all, and this list has > changed from release to release. > > > Have any final decisions been made on this matter? > > Our Qt based application, which we hope to release next year, must be able to > be *both* 32 and 64 bit on Macintosh. This isn't due to hardware constraints > but because our application allows users to use 3rd party libraries for which > they often don't have the source code. Since the version of the application > we are currently shipping is 32-bit only on Macintosh, none of these 3rd > party libraries will function if we provide only a 64-bit version of our > application. This will make it much more difficult for our users to upgrade > when we release the new version, and that's something we'd like to avoid. > > We'd like to plan to use Qt 5 for our application (instead of 4.8) but if it > soon won't be possible to build a 32-bit version we might have to stick with > Qt 4.8 (of course, that has problems of its own). > > For what it's worth, we're OK dropping support for OSX 10.6, just not the > ability to build a 32-bit application. > > Thanks > > Adam > ___ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development As I've mentioned before, I don't think dropping 32-bit support would gain much for Qt. In fact it's more work to drop it than simply keep it around. For qtbase (and other modules probably have less): it's especially not worth it for only 96 Objective-C++ source files (and one Objective-C) comprising barely 29k lines of code (compared to around 5300 files / 2m LOC for C/C++) - and remember, all but one of these files is Objective-C++, not pure Objective-C, so a good chunk of that 29k figure will just be C++, bringing the amount even lower: find . -name '*.m' -o -name '*.mm' ./config.tests/mac/corewlan/corewlantest.mm ./examples/widgets/mac/qmaccocoaviewcontainer/main.mm ./examples/widgets/mac/qmacnativewidget/main.mm ./src/corelib/io/qfilesystemwatcher_fsevents.mm ./src/corelib/io/qstandardpaths_ios.mm ./src/corelib/io/qurl_mac.mm ./src/corelib/kernel/qcore_mac_objc.mm ./src/corelib/tools/qbytearray_mac.mm ./src/corelib/tools/qlocale_mac.mm ./src/corelib/tools/qstring_mac.mm ./src/corelib/tools/qtimezoneprivate_mac.mm ./src/gui/accessible/qaccessiblecache_mac.mm ./src/network/access/qnetworkreplynsurlconnectionimpl.mm ./src/platformsupport/cglconvenience/cglconvenience.mm ./src/platformsupport/clipboard/qmacmime.mm ./src/platformsupport/eventdispatchers/qeventdispatcher_cf.mm ./src/platformsupport/fontdatabases/mac/qcoretextfontdatabase.mm ./src/platformsupport/fontdatabases/mac/qfontengine_coretext.mm ./src/plugins/bearer/corewlan/qcorewlanengine.mm ./src/plugins/bearer/corewlan/qcorewlanengine_10_6.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/main.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoaaccessibility.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoaaccessibilityelement.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoaapplication.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoaapplicationdelegate.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoaautoreleasepool.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoabackingstore.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoaclipboard.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoacolordialoghelper.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoacursor.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoadrag.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoaeventdispatcher.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoafiledialoghelper.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoafontdialoghelper.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoaglcontext.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoahelpers.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoainputcontext.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoaintegration.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoaintrospection.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoakeymapper.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoamenu.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoamenubar.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoamenuitem.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoamenuloader.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoamimetypes.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoanativeinterface.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoaprintdevice.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoaprintersupport.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoaservices.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoasystemsettings.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoasystemtrayicon.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoatheme.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qcocoawindow.mm ./src/plugins/platforms/cocoa/qmacclipboard.mm ./src/pl
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
Getting back to a thread from a few months ago On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 3:57 PM, Jake Petroules < jake.petrou...@petroules.com> wrote: > > Pretty much the only thing you lose with ARC is that it's 64-bit only and > thus using it means waving goodbye to 32-bit Qt on OS X completely. I don't > know if this is a problem for anyone. There's also a selection of classes > to which zeroing weak references cannot be made at all, and this list has > changed from release to release. > > Have any final decisions been made on this matter? Our Qt based application, which we hope to release next year, must be able to be *both* 32 and 64 bit on Macintosh. This isn't due to hardware constraints but because our application allows users to use 3rd party libraries for which they often don't have the source code. Since the version of the application we are currently shipping is 32-bit only on Macintosh, none of these 3rd party libraries will function if we provide only a 64-bit version of our application. This will make it much more difficult for our users to upgrade when we release the new version, and that's something we'd like to avoid. We'd like to plan to use Qt 5 for our application (instead of 4.8) but if it soon won't be possible to build a 32-bit version we might have to stick with Qt 4.8 (of course, that has problems of its own). For what it's worth, we're OK dropping support for OSX 10.6, just not the ability to build a 32-bit application. Thanks Adam ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 2014-03-24, at 06:16 PM, Kuba Ober wrote: > On Jan 21, 2014, at 5:23 AM, Sorvig Morten wrote: > >> I agree with many of these arguments, and I was in favor of setting the >> minimum supported version to 10.7 back when we started Qt 5 development. But >> we did make the decision to support 10.6. The implementation effort has been >> made and that decision should be respected. >> >> Obviously it’s not going to stand forever, especially when seeing the strong >> opinions from the Qt on Mac developers. We are moving in the direction of >> not supporting 10.6. The 5.3 binary packages will not support it. QtWebkit >> lives its own life - if upstream does not support 10.6 then there is little >> we can do. >> >> When we drop support for 10.6 we are going to remove the 10.6 code and start >> using ARC. I don’t think there’s much room for "community support" for 10.6 >> - if we have to keep the manual reference counting code paths we might as >> well fully support it. > > Per Apple [1]: > > "ARC is supported in Xcode 4.2 for OS X v10.6 and v10.7 (64-bit applications) > and for iOS 4 and iOS 5. > Weak references are not supported in OS X v10.6 and iOS 4.” > > Presumably ARC could be used without dropping 10.6 support, then? > > For what it’s worth, I’ve updated to Mavericks a couple days after release, > but straight from 10.6! I’ve evaluated 10.8 in the meantime, but wasn’t > running it most of the time. So I’ve been a 10.6 user on 3 machines up till > Oct 2013. > > Cheers, Kuba Ober > > [1]: > https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/releasenotes/ObjectiveC/RN-TransitioningToARC/Introduction/Introduction.html > ___ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development Just to restate: yes, that is correct ARC can be used without dropping 10.6 support. It's also possible to enable zeroing weak references on 10.6 by means of these compatibility stubs: https://github.com/plausiblelabs/PLWeakCompatibility I'm not sure if that's stable enough to be used within Qt directly but as stated in the readme, all the tricky business happens on OSes (i.e. Snow Leopard) which will not receive further updates. Pretty much the only thing you lose with ARC is that it's 64-bit only and thus using it means waving goodbye to 32-bit Qt on OS X completely. I don't know if this is a problem for anyone. There's also a selection of classes to which zeroing weak references cannot be made at all, and this list has changed from release to release. ARC may not actually benefit Qt all that much; our use of it is primarily limited to the Cocoa platform plugin, and it can't help with any CoreFoundation memory management, which we probably use more of than Cocoa anyways. -- 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
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On Jan 21, 2014, at 5:23 AM, Sorvig Morten wrote: > I agree with many of these arguments, and I was in favor of setting the > minimum supported version to 10.7 back when we started Qt 5 development. But > we did make the decision to support 10.6. The implementation effort has been > made and that decision should be respected. > > Obviously it’s not going to stand forever, especially when seeing the strong > opinions from the Qt on Mac developers. We are moving in the direction of not > supporting 10.6. The 5.3 binary packages will not support it. QtWebkit lives > its own life - if upstream does not support 10.6 then there is little we can > do. > > When we drop support for 10.6 we are going to remove the 10.6 code and start > using ARC. I don’t think there’s much room for "community support" for 10.6 - > if we have to keep the manual reference counting code paths we might as well > fully support it. Per Apple [1]: "ARC is supported in Xcode 4.2 for OS X v10.6 and v10.7 (64-bit applications) and for iOS 4 and iOS 5. Weak references are not supported in OS X v10.6 and iOS 4.” Presumably ARC could be used without dropping 10.6 support, then? For what it’s worth, I’ve updated to Mavericks a couple days after release, but straight from 10.6! I’ve evaluated 10.8 in the meantime, but wasn’t running it most of the time. So I’ve been a 10.6 user on 3 machines up till Oct 2013. Cheers, Kuba Ober [1]: https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/releasenotes/ObjectiveC/RN-TransitioningToARC/Introduction/Introduction.html ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
> Dropping support for 10.6, and making it possible to clean up that code, > would in the mid-term free up resources that would make > it possible to spend more resources on better OS X integration in general > (or, would make the existing resources more efficient in doing so)? That was the implicit assumption in my comment but I'm not in a position to comment on whether that is accurate or not. Regards, Rob. On 27 January 2014 09:08, Ziller Eike wrote: > > On Jan 26, 2014, at 8:10 PM, Robert Knight wrote: > >>> In regards to users of Mac OS Qt applications: I’m am extremely confident >>> that more Mac OS applications would be/have been written in Qt, >>> if the priority for native looking widget support was higher. Mac OS users >>> are notorious for their attention to detail and noticing a non-native L&F. >>> Forcing application developers to resort to Objective C/Cocoa/style sheet >>> hacks/whatever in order to make the UI look and behave more >>> native sort of defies the notion of a cross platform framework. >> >> Indeed. In terms of diverting resources away from supporting older >> versions of OS X this is probably going be much more compelling for Qt >> users than talk of being able to use C++11, ARC, newer naive APIs etc. >> inside Qt itself. >> >> As an aside, in a company with enough resources to have product >> designers, the designers are highly likely to be using Macs and their >> impressions of Qt apps there tend to carry over to discussions about >> what platforms to base other versions of a cross-platform app on. So >> if Digia want to sell commercial licenses to use Qt on iOS, Android >> etc. investment in Mac L&F may be quite worthwhile. > > So what’s the relationship of that discussion on quality of Qt on OS X, to > the discussion on supporting 10.6 or not? > Dropping support for 10.6, and making it possible to clean up that code, > would in the mid-term free up resources that would make it possible to spend > more resources on better OS X integration in general (or, would make the > existing resources more efficient in doing so)? > >> On 23 January 2014 21:35, Jan Farø wrote: >>> >>> On 24/01/2014, at 03.46, Alexis Menard wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Jan Farø wrote: I don’t think anybody has mentioned the lack of ability to upgrade hardware - mostly because of financial issues, I suppose. 10.6 is as far as I know the last Mac OS to support 32 bit systems. Previous versions of my own software supported PPC and down to Mac OS 10.4, which gave me a considerable user base from that segment. Percentages aside, there’s still a LOT of people sitting with old hardware, simply because they cannot afford to upgrade. >>> >>> But is that a significant part of the Mac OS X users or users of Mac OS X Qt >>> applications? I seriously doubt so. Let's be realistic, less and less >>> software are supporting PPC nowadays, the best you can get is a 32/64 bits >>> binary for Mac OS. Last machines from Apple with 32 bits only processor : >>> 2006. >>> >>> One other point is that Qt5 is about QML and is pushing towards its usage on >>> the desktop with better components for it with a modern GL scene graph. >>> Running on outdated graphic cards with outdated graphic drivers is also not >>> something people want to bother testing and fixing. >>> >>> >>> I completely agree in regards to PPC support. >>> >>> In regards to users of Mac OS Qt applications: I’m am extremely confident >>> that more Mac OS applications would be/have been written in Qt, if the >>> priority for native looking widget support was higher. Mac OS users are >>> notorious for their attention to detail and noticing a non-native L&F. >>> Forcing application developers to resort to Objective C/Cocoa/style sheet >>> hacks/whatever in order to make the UI look and behave more native sort of >>> defies the notion of a cross platform framework. >>> >>> >>> Again let's balance the cost of the maintenance of the code of 10.6 vs >>> supporting few users stuck in the past? If they must stick in the past for >>> various reasons (financial or others) then they can just use Qt4, it works >>> just fine for Mac OS 10.6 or even Qt5 released versions. Why such users >>> would care of modern Qt5 applications? >>> >>> >>> Qt4 looks suboptimal on Mac OS. It still has problems with some of the list >>> widgets. Among other things. Qt5 has several showstopper issues on Mac OS, >>> some of which seems to finally being taken seriously (5.2.1?). You can’t >>> ship a quality application on Mac OS with Qt5.0 - Qt.5.2.0. >>> >>> >>> >>> ___ >>> Development mailing list >>> Development@qt-project.org >>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development >>> >> ___ >> Development mailing list >> Development@qt-project.org >> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/developme
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On Jan 26, 2014, at 8:10 PM, Robert Knight wrote: >> In regards to users of Mac OS Qt applications: I’m am extremely confident >> that more Mac OS applications would be/have been written in Qt, >> if the priority for native looking widget support was higher. Mac OS users >> are notorious for their attention to detail and noticing a non-native L&F. >> Forcing application developers to resort to Objective C/Cocoa/style sheet >> hacks/whatever in order to make the UI look and behave more >> native sort of defies the notion of a cross platform framework. > > Indeed. In terms of diverting resources away from supporting older > versions of OS X this is probably going be much more compelling for Qt > users than talk of being able to use C++11, ARC, newer naive APIs etc. > inside Qt itself. > > As an aside, in a company with enough resources to have product > designers, the designers are highly likely to be using Macs and their > impressions of Qt apps there tend to carry over to discussions about > what platforms to base other versions of a cross-platform app on. So > if Digia want to sell commercial licenses to use Qt on iOS, Android > etc. investment in Mac L&F may be quite worthwhile. So what’s the relationship of that discussion on quality of Qt on OS X, to the discussion on supporting 10.6 or not? Dropping support for 10.6, and making it possible to clean up that code, would in the mid-term free up resources that would make it possible to spend more resources on better OS X integration in general (or, would make the existing resources more efficient in doing so)? > On 23 January 2014 21:35, Jan Farø wrote: >> >> On 24/01/2014, at 03.46, Alexis Menard wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Jan Farø wrote: >>> >>> >>> I don’t think anybody has mentioned the lack of ability to upgrade >>> hardware - mostly because of financial issues, I suppose. 10.6 is as far as >>> I know the last Mac OS to support 32 bit systems. Previous versions of my >>> own software supported PPC and down to Mac OS 10.4, which gave me a >>> considerable user base from that segment. Percentages aside, there’s still a >>> LOT of people sitting with old hardware, simply because they cannot afford >>> to upgrade. >>> >> >> But is that a significant part of the Mac OS X users or users of Mac OS X Qt >> applications? I seriously doubt so. Let's be realistic, less and less >> software are supporting PPC nowadays, the best you can get is a 32/64 bits >> binary for Mac OS. Last machines from Apple with 32 bits only processor : >> 2006. >> >> One other point is that Qt5 is about QML and is pushing towards its usage on >> the desktop with better components for it with a modern GL scene graph. >> Running on outdated graphic cards with outdated graphic drivers is also not >> something people want to bother testing and fixing. >> >> >> I completely agree in regards to PPC support. >> >> In regards to users of Mac OS Qt applications: I’m am extremely confident >> that more Mac OS applications would be/have been written in Qt, if the >> priority for native looking widget support was higher. Mac OS users are >> notorious for their attention to detail and noticing a non-native L&F. >> Forcing application developers to resort to Objective C/Cocoa/style sheet >> hacks/whatever in order to make the UI look and behave more native sort of >> defies the notion of a cross platform framework. >> >> >> Again let's balance the cost of the maintenance of the code of 10.6 vs >> supporting few users stuck in the past? If they must stick in the past for >> various reasons (financial or others) then they can just use Qt4, it works >> just fine for Mac OS 10.6 or even Qt5 released versions. Why such users >> would care of modern Qt5 applications? >> >> >> Qt4 looks suboptimal on Mac OS. It still has problems with some of the list >> widgets. Among other things. Qt5 has several showstopper issues on Mac OS, >> some of which seems to finally being taken seriously (5.2.1?). You can’t >> ship a quality application on Mac OS with Qt5.0 - Qt.5.2.0. >> >> >> >> ___ >> Development mailing list >> Development@qt-project.org >> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development >> > ___ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development -- Eike Ziller, Senior Software Engineer - Digia, Qt Digia Germany GmbH, Rudower Chaussee 13, D-12489 Berlin Geschäftsführer: Mika Pälsi, Juha Varelius, Tuula Haataja Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 144331 B ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
> In regards to users of Mac OS Qt applications: I’m am extremely confident > that more Mac OS applications would be/have been written in Qt, > if the priority for native looking widget support was higher. Mac OS users > are notorious for their attention to detail and noticing a non-native L&F. > Forcing application developers to resort to Objective C/Cocoa/style sheet > hacks/whatever in order to make the UI look and behave more > native sort of defies the notion of a cross platform framework. Indeed. In terms of diverting resources away from supporting older versions of OS X this is probably going be much more compelling for Qt users than talk of being able to use C++11, ARC, newer naive APIs etc. inside Qt itself. As an aside, in a company with enough resources to have product designers, the designers are highly likely to be using Macs and their impressions of Qt apps there tend to carry over to discussions about what platforms to base other versions of a cross-platform app on. So if Digia want to sell commercial licenses to use Qt on iOS, Android etc. investment in Mac L&F may be quite worthwhile. On 23 January 2014 21:35, Jan Farø wrote: > > On 24/01/2014, at 03.46, Alexis Menard wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Jan Farø wrote: >> >> >> I don’t think anybody has mentioned the lack of ability to upgrade >> hardware - mostly because of financial issues, I suppose. 10.6 is as far as >> I know the last Mac OS to support 32 bit systems. Previous versions of my >> own software supported PPC and down to Mac OS 10.4, which gave me a >> considerable user base from that segment. Percentages aside, there’s still a >> LOT of people sitting with old hardware, simply because they cannot afford >> to upgrade. >> > > But is that a significant part of the Mac OS X users or users of Mac OS X Qt > applications? I seriously doubt so. Let's be realistic, less and less > software are supporting PPC nowadays, the best you can get is a 32/64 bits > binary for Mac OS. Last machines from Apple with 32 bits only processor : > 2006. > > One other point is that Qt5 is about QML and is pushing towards its usage on > the desktop with better components for it with a modern GL scene graph. > Running on outdated graphic cards with outdated graphic drivers is also not > something people want to bother testing and fixing. > > > I completely agree in regards to PPC support. > > In regards to users of Mac OS Qt applications: I’m am extremely confident > that more Mac OS applications would be/have been written in Qt, if the > priority for native looking widget support was higher. Mac OS users are > notorious for their attention to detail and noticing a non-native L&F. > Forcing application developers to resort to Objective C/Cocoa/style sheet > hacks/whatever in order to make the UI look and behave more native sort of > defies the notion of a cross platform framework. > > > Again let's balance the cost of the maintenance of the code of 10.6 vs > supporting few users stuck in the past? If they must stick in the past for > various reasons (financial or others) then they can just use Qt4, it works > just fine for Mac OS 10.6 or even Qt5 released versions. Why such users > would care of modern Qt5 applications? > > > Qt4 looks suboptimal on Mac OS. It still has problems with some of the list > widgets. Among other things. Qt5 has several showstopper issues on Mac OS, > some of which seems to finally being taken seriously (5.2.1?). You can’t > ship a quality application on Mac OS with Qt5.0 - Qt.5.2.0. > > > > ___ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development > ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
>> XP was introduced in 2001. It’s still supported. Mac OS 10.6 was >> introduced in 2009. I understand the desire to get rid of the messiness >> under the hood, but I think it should be considered that it cuts out users >> on hardware platforms not so much up to date. > > > Right but the difference is that Microsoft was not very good at making a > decent successor of XP which made most of the people stick with XP. > > > It’s not just that. This also has to do with the cost of upgrading > hardware. Charts describing OS destribution, top contributors mentioned): > > Worldwide: http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-monthly-201212-201312-bar (Win7: > 52%, XP: 22%, Mac OS: 7%) > > Denmark: http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-DK-monthly-201212-201312-bar (Win7: > 53%, Mac OS: 16%, iOS: 8.5%) > Denmark is a country with big purchasing power. Win XP is almost gone here, > below Mac OS and iOS, units usually associated with higher price. > > China: http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-CN-monthly-201212-201312-bar (XP: 56%, > Win7: 36%, Win8: 2%) > XP dominates here. One might suspect the cause being less general buying > power. Note the lack of Apple hardware in the top. > > Cuba: http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-CU-monthly-201212-201312-bar (WP: 51%, > Win7: 32%, Linux: 6.7% > Same here. Note the sudden appearance of Linux. Many Linux distros runs well > on lower powered hardware. I doubt that Cubans are die hard Linux fans in > general. > > I don’t think I’m interpreting too much from the above by stating that the > popularity of older OS versions are dependent on buying power and geography, > not just the existence of replacement candidates. If you're going to make a commercial argument based on 'buying power' then you also need to factor in how many of those installations have actually paid for their licenses. Or more specifically, how many of them are going to pay to buy applications developed in Qt. As an open source developer I don't really care, but we have limited resources so a target platform that isn't going to offer a return for commercial developers /or/ open source developers isn't sustainable. Cheers Rich. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On sexta-feira, 24 de janeiro de 2014 09:37:57, Kurt Pattyn wrote: > Why not just freeze the Qt development for 10.6? After all, developing for > 10.6 will still be possible with Qt 5.3. I don’t see any problem here. It’s > not that the code will get removed from the repo; it is only that no new > developments will take place for that platform. Yes, it will be. The 10.6 case is like the Win95/98/Me and the Symbian case: the support for the platform clutters the source code and we can make it better by cleaning up. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 24/01/2014, at 17.36, Alexis Menard wrote: >> >> Again let's balance the cost of the maintenance of the code of 10.6 vs >> supporting few users stuck in the past? If they must stick in the past for >> various reasons (financial or others) then they can just use Qt4, it works >> just fine for Mac OS 10.6 or even Qt5 released versions. Why such users >> would care of modern Qt5 applications? > > Qt4 looks suboptimal on Mac OS. It still has problems with some of the list > widgets. Among other things. Qt5 has several showstopper issues on Mac OS, > some of which seems to finally being taken seriously (5.2.1?). You can’t ship > a quality application on Mac OS with Qt5.0 - Qt.5.2.0. > > > > This is another topic. > > > -- > Alexis Menard I think it’s fairly relevant as a response to a claim that Qt on Mac works fine on existing/previous Qt versions, when that’s not entirely the case. At the very least, we may have different definitions of the term “works fine”. It is another topic, a topic which I’ve tried to raise on this list before with very limited interest, much like my recent letter to Digia on the same topic. Anyways. Thanks for the responses - I’ll leave the subject before I get too unpopular ;-)___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 6:35 PM, Jan Farø wrote: > > On 24/01/2014, at 03.46, Alexis Menard wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Jan Farø wrote: > >> >> I don’t think anybody has mentioned the lack of ability to upgrade >> hardware - mostly because of financial issues, I suppose. 10.6 is as far as >> I know the last Mac OS to support 32 bit systems. Previous versions of my >> own software supported PPC and down to Mac OS 10.4, which gave me a >> considerable user base from that segment. Percentages aside, there’s still >> a LOT of people sitting with old hardware, simply because they cannot >> afford to upgrade. >> >> > But is that a significant part of the Mac OS X users or users of Mac OS X > Qt applications? I seriously doubt so. Let's be realistic, less and less > software are supporting PPC nowadays, the best you can get is a 32/64 bits > binary for Mac OS. Last machines from Apple with 32 bits only processor : > 2006. > > One other point is that Qt5 is about QML and is pushing towards its usage > on the desktop with better components for it with a modern GL scene graph. > Running on outdated graphic cards with outdated graphic drivers is also not > something people want to bother testing and fixing. > > > I completely agree in regards to PPC support. > > In regards to users of Mac OS Qt applications: I’m am extremely confident > that more Mac OS applications would be/have been written in Qt, if the > priority for native looking widget support was higher. Mac OS users are > notorious for their attention to detail and noticing a non-native L&F. > Forcing application developers to resort to Objective C/Cocoa/style sheet > hacks/whatever in order to make the UI look and behave more native sort of > defies the notion of a cross platform framework. > Right but your point is about people with no condition to upgrade. You're asking then the Qt project to support a fraction of users who have 32 bits only machine so 8+ years old machines (if these are still alive). Others can and should upgrade to Lion (it'd 29 USD if it's not free nowadays). If they don't want to upgrade there is nothing we can do about it but we're talking now of supporting a very little amount of users. Maybe few of them will make the 29 USD switch if Qt doesn't support the old OS they're running on. Sorry I just can't make sense out of it. Code freeze makes no sense also as it will stop improvements in Qt the way it does today. I don't see how this improves the current situation : the actual maintainers would like to simplify the entire Mac OS port. Freezing these code paths is postponing future refactors or improvements Qt really needs (ARC, ). > > > Again let's balance the cost of the maintenance of the code of 10.6 vs > supporting few users stuck in the past? If they must stick in the past for > various reasons (financial or others) then they can just use Qt4, it works > just fine for Mac OS 10.6 or even Qt5 released versions. Why such users > would care of modern Qt5 applications? > > > Qt4 looks suboptimal on Mac OS. It still has problems with some of the > list widgets. Among other things. Qt5 has several showstopper issues on Mac > OS, some of which seems to finally being taken seriously (5.2.1?). You > can’t ship a quality application on Mac OS with Qt5.0 - Qt.5.2.0. > > > This is another topic. -- Alexis Menard ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
> On 23 Jan 2014, at 21:16, Jan Farø wrote: > > I don’t think anybody has mentioned the lack of ability to upgrade hardware - > mostly because of financial issues, I suppose. 10.6 is as far as I know the > last Mac OS to support 32 bit systems. Previous versions of my own software > supported PPC and down to Mac OS 10.4, which gave me a considerable user base > from that segment. Percentages aside, there’s still a LOT of people sitting > with old hardware, simply because they cannot afford to upgrade. > > XP was introduced in 2001. It’s still supported. Mac OS 10.6 was introduced > in 2009. I understand the desire to get rid of the messiness under the hood, > but I think it should be considered that it cuts out users on hardware > platforms not so much up to date. Support for XP stops at end 2014: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/enterprise/endofsupport.aspx. And Microsoft Visual Studio 2012 cannot be installed on XP, but you can target XP (and that was already in 2012). Why not just freeze the Qt development for 10.6? After all, developing for 10.6 will still be possible with Qt 5.3. I don’t see any problem here. It’s not that the code will get removed from the repo; it is only that no new developments will take place for that platform. In the meanwhile, development energy can go into new territories like mobile and embedded devices (internet of things). Personally, I'd rather use Qt for developing an app for Android or iOS, than developing one for Windows XP or OS X 10.6. It is true that there is still a huge install base of 'legacy' OSs. Besides limited financial reach, there is also another reason: certification. In the medical market for instance, we see figures of 90% and up of Windows XP installations. But then on these systems no new applications are installed, nor is it expected that new applications are installable on those platforms. IT departments more and more switch to VDI to support these legacy systems. So, +1 for freezing development for OSX 10.6. —Kurt ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On sexta-feira, 24 de janeiro de 2014 06:20:23, Jan Farø wrote: > Worldwide: http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-monthly-201212-201312-bar (Win7: > 52%, XP: 22%, Mac OS: 7%) > > Denmark: http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-DK-monthly-201212-201312-bar (Win7: > 53%, Mac OS: 16%, iOS: 8.5%) Denmark is a country with big purchasing > power. Win XP is almost gone here, below Mac OS and iOS, units usually > associated with higher price. > > China: http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-CN-monthly-201212-201312-bar (XP: 56%, > Win7: 36%, Win8: 2%) XP dominates here. One might suspect the cause being > less general buying power. Note the lack of Apple hardware in the top. > > Cuba: http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-CU-monthly-201212-201312-bar (WP: 51%, > Win7: 32%, Linux: 6.7% Same here. Note the sudden appearance of Linux. > Many Linux distros runs well on lower powered hardware. I doubt that Cubans > are die hard Linux fans in general. > > I don’t think I’m interpreting too much from the above by stating that the > popularity of older OS versions are dependent on buying power and > geography, not just the existence of replacement candidates. _ We don't doubt it. But the question is whether those older OS are targets for applications shipping with Qt 5.4. So it's really about the target user base of applications to be released one year from now. It's not about asking Qt users what they'd like. We know the answer: "please support OS X on PPC, Windows XP, and please bring back Windows 95, OS/2 and BeOS while you're at it". It's about what will need one year from now. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On sexta-feira, 24 de janeiro de 2014 03:16:54, Jan Farø wrote: > XP was introduced in 2001. It’s still supported. We had a thread on that too. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 24/01/2014, at 03.46, Alexis Menard wrote: > > XP was introduced in 2001. It’s still supported. Mac OS 10.6 was introduced > in 2009. I understand the desire to get rid of the messiness under the hood, > but I think it should be considered that it cuts out users on hardware > platforms not so much up to date. > > Right but the difference is that Microsoft was not very good at making a > decent successor of XP which made most of the people stick with XP. It’s not just that. This also has to do with the cost of upgrading hardware. Charts describing OS destribution, top contributors mentioned): Worldwide: http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-monthly-201212-201312-bar (Win7: 52%, XP: 22%, Mac OS: 7%) Denmark: http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-DK-monthly-201212-201312-bar (Win7: 53%, Mac OS: 16%, iOS: 8.5%) Denmark is a country with big purchasing power. Win XP is almost gone here, below Mac OS and iOS, units usually associated with higher price. China: http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-CN-monthly-201212-201312-bar (XP: 56%, Win7: 36%, Win8: 2%) XP dominates here. One might suspect the cause being less general buying power. Note the lack of Apple hardware in the top. Cuba: http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-CU-monthly-201212-201312-bar (WP: 51%, Win7: 32%, Linux: 6.7% Same here. Note the sudden appearance of Linux. Many Linux distros runs well on lower powered hardware. I doubt that Cubans are die hard Linux fans in general. I don’t think I’m interpreting too much from the above by stating that the popularity of older OS versions are dependent on buying power and geography, not just the existence of replacement candidates. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 24/01/2014, at 03.46, Alexis Menard wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Jan Farø wrote: > > I don’t think anybody has mentioned the lack of ability to upgrade hardware - > mostly because of financial issues, I suppose. 10.6 is as far as I know the > last Mac OS to support 32 bit systems. Previous versions of my own software > supported PPC and down to Mac OS 10.4, which gave me a considerable user base > from that segment. Percentages aside, there’s still a LOT of people sitting > with old hardware, simply because they cannot afford to upgrade. > > > But is that a significant part of the Mac OS X users or users of Mac OS X Qt > applications? I seriously doubt so. Let's be realistic, less and less > software are supporting PPC nowadays, the best you can get is a 32/64 bits > binary for Mac OS. Last machines from Apple with 32 bits only processor : > 2006. > > One other point is that Qt5 is about QML and is pushing towards its usage on > the desktop with better components for it with a modern GL scene graph. > Running on outdated graphic cards with outdated graphic drivers is also not > something people want to bother testing and fixing. I completely agree in regards to PPC support. In regards to users of Mac OS Qt applications: I’m am extremely confident that more Mac OS applications would be/have been written in Qt, if the priority for native looking widget support was higher. Mac OS users are notorious for their attention to detail and noticing a non-native L&F. Forcing application developers to resort to Objective C/Cocoa/style sheet hacks/whatever in order to make the UI look and behave more native sort of defies the notion of a cross platform framework. > > Again let's balance the cost of the maintenance of the code of 10.6 vs > supporting few users stuck in the past? If they must stick in the past for > various reasons (financial or others) then they can just use Qt4, it works > just fine for Mac OS 10.6 or even Qt5 released versions. Why such users would > care of modern Qt5 applications? Qt4 looks suboptimal on Mac OS. It still has problems with some of the list widgets. Among other things. Qt5 has several showstopper issues on Mac OS, some of which seems to finally being taken seriously (5.2.1?). You can’t ship a quality application on Mac OS with Qt5.0 - Qt.5.2.0. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Jan Farø wrote: > > On 23/01/2014, at 23.59, development-requ...@qt-project.org wrote: > > > If you do the math from the data available here > http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0 > (that’s December 2013), 10.6 accounts for slightly less than 20% of all > the OS X versions. Let’s suppose those numbers reflect the reality. > > > For our app at least, the numbers are close to our actual OS X usage > figures. Last I checked in September 2013, 20% of Mac users were on OS > X 10.6. I should be able to get more up to date numbers if that is > useful. > > As for the reason why usage of OS X 10.6 is still high - I think that > is down to awareness of the need to upgrade and the effort/time vs. > perceived benefits, as well as hardware compatibility issues. Once > browsers (FF, Chrome) make a move towards dropping 10.6 support this > might help awareness. > > Regards, > Rob. > > > I don’t think anybody has mentioned the lack of ability to upgrade > hardware - mostly because of financial issues, I suppose. 10.6 is as far as > I know the last Mac OS to support 32 bit systems. Previous versions of my > own software supported PPC and down to Mac OS 10.4, which gave me a > considerable user base from that segment. Percentages aside, there’s still > a LOT of people sitting with old hardware, simply because they cannot > afford to upgrade. > > But is that a significant part of the Mac OS X users or users of Mac OS X Qt applications? I seriously doubt so. Let's be realistic, less and less software are supporting PPC nowadays, the best you can get is a 32/64 bits binary for Mac OS. Last machines from Apple with 32 bits only processor : 2006. One other point is that Qt5 is about QML and is pushing towards its usage on the desktop with better components for it with a modern GL scene graph. Running on outdated graphic cards with outdated graphic drivers is also not something people want to bother testing and fixing. Again let's balance the cost of the maintenance of the code of 10.6 vs supporting few users stuck in the past? If they must stick in the past for various reasons (financial or others) then they can just use Qt4, it works just fine for Mac OS 10.6 or even Qt5 released versions. Why such users would care of modern Qt5 applications? I would really understand people pushing for supporting an outdated OS (and not maintained anymore) on old hardware if they were no alternatives for them : in that case there are -> Qt4 or Qt 5.0, 5.1, 5.2 even. People want the benefits for free, how many of the Qt developers/users with outdated 10.6 are actually contributing to fix the port? Other thing I would recommend your user base to be *very* careful with their outdated machine as for example Safari is not updated anymore on Snow Leopard letting the browser very vulnerable to security issues. XP was introduced in 2001. It’s still supported. Mac OS 10.6 was introduced > in 2009. I understand the desire to get rid of the messiness under the > hood, but I think it should be considered that it cuts out users on > hardware platforms not so much up to date. > Right but the difference is that Microsoft was not very good at making a decent successor of XP which made most of the people stick with XP. > > ___ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development > > -- Alexis Menard ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 23/01/2014, at 23.59, development-requ...@qt-project.org wrote: > >> If you do the math from the data available here >> http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0 >> (that’s December 2013), 10.6 accounts for slightly less than 20% of all the >> OS X versions. Let’s suppose those numbers reflect the reality. > > For our app at least, the numbers are close to our actual OS X usage > figures. Last I checked in September 2013, 20% of Mac users were on OS > X 10.6. I should be able to get more up to date numbers if that is > useful. > > As for the reason why usage of OS X 10.6 is still high - I think that > is down to awareness of the need to upgrade and the effort/time vs. > perceived benefits, as well as hardware compatibility issues. Once > browsers (FF, Chrome) make a move towards dropping 10.6 support this > might help awareness. > > Regards, > Rob. I don’t think anybody has mentioned the lack of ability to upgrade hardware - mostly because of financial issues, I suppose. 10.6 is as far as I know the last Mac OS to support 32 bit systems. Previous versions of my own software supported PPC and down to Mac OS 10.4, which gave me a considerable user base from that segment. Percentages aside, there’s still a LOT of people sitting with old hardware, simply because they cannot afford to upgrade. XP was introduced in 2001. It’s still supported. Mac OS 10.6 was introduced in 2009. I understand the desire to get rid of the messiness under the hood, but I think it should be considered that it cuts out users on hardware platforms not so much up to date.___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 2014-01-23, at 11:45 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote: > On quinta-feira, 23 de janeiro de 2014 15:15:16, Robert Knight wrote: >> As for the reason why usage of OS X 10.6 is still high - I think that >> is down to awareness of the need to upgrade and the effort/time vs. >> perceived benefits, as well as hardware compatibility issues. Once >> browsers (FF, Chrome) make a move towards dropping 10.6 support this >> might help awareness. > > 10.6 is the last version to support running on 32-bit x86 processors, just > like 10.5 was the last with PowerPC support. Also remember that while 10.5 is the last version to run on PowerPC processors, 10.6 is the last version to support running PowerPC applications using the Rosetta emulator, and as a development environment, it's the latest OS X which can target all versions of OS X on all architectures. > -- > Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com > Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center > ___ > 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
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On quinta-feira, 23 de janeiro de 2014 15:15:16, Robert Knight wrote: > As for the reason why usage of OS X 10.6 is still high - I think that > is down to awareness of the need to upgrade and the effort/time vs. > perceived benefits, as well as hardware compatibility issues. Once > browsers (FF, Chrome) make a move towards dropping 10.6 support this > might help awareness. 10.6 is the last version to support running on 32-bit x86 processors, just like 10.5 was the last with PowerPC support. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
> If you do the math from the data available here > http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0 > (that’s December 2013), 10.6 accounts for slightly less than 20% of all the > OS X versions. Let’s suppose those numbers reflect the reality. For our app at least, the numbers are close to our actual OS X usage figures. Last I checked in September 2013, 20% of Mac users were on OS X 10.6. I should be able to get more up to date numbers if that is useful. As for the reason why usage of OS X 10.6 is still high - I think that is down to awareness of the need to upgrade and the effort/time vs. perceived benefits, as well as hardware compatibility issues. Once browsers (FF, Chrome) make a move towards dropping 10.6 support this might help awareness. Regards, Rob. On 23 January 2014 12:09, deDietrich Gabriel wrote: > On Jan 23, 2014, at 12:43 PM, Tor Arne Vestbø > wrote: >> On 22/01/14 9:02 , Ziller Eike wrote: >>> >>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 2:56 PM, Tor Arne Vestbø >>> wrote: 5.3: - Remove support from binary packages - No CI = In practice, deprecated, so let's be explicit about it for 5.3 5.4 - Bump the dev branch to 5.4 - Remove 10.6 code as see fit - Apply 10.6 fixes to 5.3.x (stable) as normal The message is "Qt 5.3 deprecates 10.6 support (but is available for source builds for the lifetime of 5.3), and 5.4 will remove it.” >>> >>> I’d support this plan, and additionally throw in: >>> >>> after 5.3 / Qt Creator 3.2: - drop support for compiling & running Qt >>> Creator on 10.6 >>> >>> We want to start using C++11 also in Qt Creator, and 10.6 is the only >>> thing preventing that. Since 10.6 is deployment target only for Qt, >>> we don’t necessarily need to keep “its IDE” running there (yes, >>> that’s a Qt-centric way of looking at Qt Creator). >> >> I think it makes perfect sense. >> >> tor arne > > > I second that. > > Best regards, > > Dr. Gabriel de Dietrich > Senior Software Developer > qt.digia.com > > ___ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On Jan 23, 2014, at 12:43 PM, Tor Arne Vestbø wrote: > On 22/01/14 9:02 , Ziller Eike wrote: >> >> On Jan 21, 2014, at 2:56 PM, Tor Arne Vestbø >> wrote: >>> 5.3: >>> >>> - Remove support from binary packages - No CI = In practice, >>> deprecated, so let's be explicit about it for 5.3 >>> >>> 5.4 >>> >>> - Bump the dev branch to 5.4 - Remove 10.6 code as see fit - Apply >>> 10.6 fixes to 5.3.x (stable) as normal >>> >>> The message is "Qt 5.3 deprecates 10.6 support (but is available >>> for source builds for the lifetime of 5.3), and 5.4 will remove >>> it.” >> >> I’d support this plan, and additionally throw in: >> >> after 5.3 / Qt Creator 3.2: - drop support for compiling & running Qt >> Creator on 10.6 >> >> We want to start using C++11 also in Qt Creator, and 10.6 is the only >> thing preventing that. Since 10.6 is deployment target only for Qt, >> we don’t necessarily need to keep “its IDE” running there (yes, >> that’s a Qt-centric way of looking at Qt Creator). > > I think it makes perfect sense. > > tor arne I second that. Best regards, Dr. Gabriel de Dietrich Senior Software Developer qt.digia.com ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 22/01/14 9:02 , Ziller Eike wrote: > > On Jan 21, 2014, at 2:56 PM, Tor Arne Vestbø > wrote: >> 5.3: >> >> - Remove support from binary packages - No CI = In practice, >> deprecated, so let's be explicit about it for 5.3 >> >> 5.4 >> >> - Bump the dev branch to 5.4 - Remove 10.6 code as see fit - Apply >> 10.6 fixes to 5.3.x (stable) as normal >> >> The message is "Qt 5.3 deprecates 10.6 support (but is available >> for source builds for the lifetime of 5.3), and 5.4 will remove >> it.” > > I’d support this plan, and additionally throw in: > > after 5.3 / Qt Creator 3.2: - drop support for compiling & running Qt > Creator on 10.6 > > We want to start using C++11 also in Qt Creator, and 10.6 is the only > thing preventing that. Since 10.6 is deployment target only for Qt, > we don’t necessarily need to keep “its IDE” running there (yes, > that’s a Qt-centric way of looking at Qt Creator). I think it makes perfect sense. tor arne ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On Jan 21, 2014, at 2:56 PM, Tor Arne Vestbø wrote: > On 21/01/14 13:36 , Sorvig Morten wrote: >> 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. > > 5.3: > > - Remove support from binary packages > - No CI > = In practice, deprecated, so let's be explicit about it for 5.3 > > 5.4 > > - Bump the dev branch to 5.4 > - Remove 10.6 code as see fit > - Apply 10.6 fixes to 5.3.x (stable) as normal > > The message is "Qt 5.3 deprecates 10.6 support (but is available for > source builds for the lifetime of 5.3), and 5.4 will remove it.” I’d support this plan, and additionally throw in: after 5.3 / Qt Creator 3.2: - drop support for compiling & running Qt Creator on 10.6 We want to start using C++11 also in Qt Creator, and 10.6 is the only thing preventing that. Since 10.6 is deployment target only for Qt, we don’t necessarily need to keep “its IDE” running there (yes, that’s a Qt-centric way of looking at Qt Creator). Br, Eike -- Eike Ziller, Senior Software Engineer - Digia, Qt Digia Germany GmbH, Rudower Chaussee 13, D-12489 Berlin Geschäftsführer: Mika Pälsi, Juha Varelius, Tuula Haataja Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 144331 B ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On Jan 21, 2014, at 3:15 PM, Sorvig Morten wrote: > On 20 Jan 2014, at 21:21, deDietrich Gabriel > wrote: >> The truth is, market share doesn’t mean anything. Point in case: According >> to the link above, OS X is less than 8% of the total market share. Should we >> then drop the Mac port completely? > > Good question! Possible arguments for not discontinuing the Mac port: > > - The holistic view. The single platform is not that important, but as a part > of a comprehensive platform support package it becomes valuable. > - The 8% OS X users represent a group we want to target. > - We can use the Mac port to make Qt better. Case in point the high-dpi > support developed for OS X can be used on Wayland as well. - A good part of the OS X port is useful for the iOS port, and on the smartphone market the numbers are pretty different -- Eike Ziller, Senior Software Engineer - Digia, Qt Digia Germany GmbH, Rudower Chaussee 13, D-12489 Berlin Geschäftsführer: Mika Pälsi, Juha Varelius, Tuula Haataja Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 144331 B ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On Jan 21, 2014, at 3:01 PM, Mohamed Fawzi wrote: > > On 21 Jan 2014, at 14:25, Jake Petroules > wrote: > >> On Jan 21, 2014, at 7:36 AM, Sorvig Morten wrote: >> >>> On 21 Jan 2014, at 11:51, Simon Hausmann 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 also think that it looks reasonable, but I would also find announcing now > that 5.4 drops 10.6 support ok (I don't see this big need for "deprecated but > still there" if one knows long enough before). > Anyway another thing (with ARC support) is also C++11. > Is it clear when we will begin to require C++11? > Because supporting C++11 in 10.6 is *very* tricky (one might try to ship > libc++, but system library will still use libstdc++ and I am not sure if > binary compatibility with the version shipped in 10.6 is guaranteed. You can’t compile C++11 code if you use deployment target 10.6 (the Apple tools prevent that), so “ship libc++” is out of question. The only maybe-possible path would be to use custom GNU libs instead of the Apple-provided ones, but I do not think that we want to support that in any way. ++ Eike > Fawzi >> >> 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. >> [...] > > ___ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development -- Eike Ziller, Senior Software Engineer - Digia, Qt Digia Germany GmbH, Rudower Chaussee 13, D-12489 Berlin Geschäftsführer: Mika Pälsi, Juha Varelius, Tuula Haataja Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 144331 B ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 21 janv. 2014, at 14:25, Jake Petroules wrote: > On Jan 21, 2014, at 7:36 AM, Sorvig Morten wrote: > >> On 21 Jan 2014, at 11:51, Simon Hausmann 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. > One that I can see is the direct use of the old QuickTime framework to have a complete access to the available set of codecs and their parameters. IIRC, QTKit was not on par with QuickTime in terms of codec handling and ease of access. I know it might not be a common use case, just my 2 cents >> >> 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 ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On Tuesday 21 January 2014, Sorvig Morten wrote: > Obviously it’s not going to stand forever, especially when seeing the > strong opinions from the Qt on Mac developers. We are moving in the > direction of not supporting 10.6. The 5.3 binary packages will not support > it. QtWebkit lives its own life - if upstream does not support 10.6 then > there is little we can do. > QtWebKit in Qt 5.2 does support 10.6, and since the branch used by 5.2 is scheduled to be the last upstream branch of WebKit, it should not be a problem (at least not any more, I had to perform major surgery on the code to even build with gcc 4.2). So QtWebKit should have no problem continuing the same support as the rest of Qt for 10.6. Regards `Allan ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 21 Jan 2014, at 13:20, Tor Arne Vestbø wrote: > > > On 21/01/14 11:23 , Sorvig Morten wrote: >> I agree with many of these arguments, and I was in favor of setting >> the minimum supported version to 10.7 back when we started Qt 5 >> development. But we did make the decision to support 10.6. The >> implementation effort has been made and that decision should be >> respected. > > I don't get this. Is this an argument for keeping 10.6 support until 6.0? Is > the support matrix frozen once a x.0 release is out? If not, when do we drop > support? No, having to keep support until 6.0 would not work. We drop support when the reasons for dropping support outweigh the reasons for keeping it. Not throwing away work already done is a reason for keeping support. But as I note in the next paragraph that reason is not valid forever. Morten ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 20 Jan 2014, at 21:21, deDietrich Gabriel wrote: > The truth is, market share doesn’t mean anything. Point in case: According to > the link above, OS X is less than 8% of the total market share. Should we > then drop the Mac port completely? Good question! Possible arguments for not discontinuing the Mac port: - The holistic view. The single platform is not that important, but as a part of a comprehensive platform support package it becomes valuable. - The 8% OS X users represent a group we want to target. - We can use the Mac port to make Qt better. Case in point the high-dpi support developed for OS X can be used on Wayland as well. Morten ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 21 Jan 2014, at 14:25, Jake Petroules mailto:jake.petrou...@petroules.com>> wrote: On Jan 21, 2014, at 7:36 AM, Sorvig Morten mailto:morten.sor...@digia.com>> wrote: On 21 Jan 2014, at 11:51, Simon Hausmann mailto: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 also think that it looks reasonable, but I would also find announcing now that 5.4 drops 10.6 support ok (I don't see this big need for "deprecated but still there" if one knows long enough before). Anyway another thing (with ARC support) is also C++11. Is it clear when we will begin to require C++11? Because supporting C++11 in 10.6 is *very* tricky (one might try to ship libc++, but system library will still use libstdc++ and I am not sure if binary compatibility with the version shipped in 10.6 is guaranteed. Fawzi 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. [...] ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 21/01/14 13:36 , Sorvig Morten wrote: > 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. 5.3: - Remove support from binary packages - No CI = In practice, deprecated, so let's be explicit about it for 5.3 5.4 - Bump the dev branch to 5.4 - Remove 10.6 code as see fit - Apply 10.6 fixes to 5.3.x (stable) as normal The message is "Qt 5.3 deprecates 10.6 support (but is available for source builds for the lifetime of 5.3), and 5.4 will remove it." tor arne ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On Jan 21, 2014, at 7:36 AM, Sorvig Morten wrote: > On 21 Jan 2014, at 11:51, Simon Hausmann 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
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 21 Jan 2014, at 11:51, Simon Hausmann wrote: > On Tuesday 21. January 2014 10.23.22 Sorvig Morten wrote: >> On 21 Jan 2014, at 09:32, Simon Hausmann wrote: >>> On Monday 20. January 2014 20.21.14 deDietrich Gabriel wrote: On Jan 20, 2014, at 7:55 PM, Allan Sandfeld Jensen > wrote: > On Monday 20 January 2014, Thiago Macieira wrote: >> On segunda-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2014 17:36:26, Kurt Pattyn wrote: >>> The CI system is still building for OSX 10.6. >>> Given the fact that OSX is at version 10.9 now, shouldn’t the build >>> for >>> 10.6 be removed, and ideally replaced with a build for OSX 10.9? >> >> Only if we decide to stop supporting 10.6 entirely. So the question is: >> do >> we drop it? >> >> Mac devs, what say you? > > Could we drop support for build on 10.6, but still support it as runtime > platform? That seems to be how Apple prefers to support older versions. > The > question is of course if out CI system would be able to handle building > on > 10.7 but running on 10.6 IIRC, this has been the official statement since Qt 5.0. And yet, for some reason, the CI is treating 10.6 as any other platform. If you do the math from the data available here http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10 &q pcustomd=0 (that’s December 2013), 10.6 accounts for slightly less than 20% of all the OS X versions. Let’s suppose those numbers reflect the reality. Is 20% a lot? I don’t know. Is that 20% the same proportion for Qt 5 end-users? Or Qt 5 developers making a life out of it? Absolutely no idea. Do I see that many bugs reported on 10.6? No, not at all. The truth is, market share doesn’t mean anything. Point in case: According to the link above, OS X is less than 8% of the total market share. Should we then drop the Mac port completely? For all I know, that twenty-something percent of Mac users running 10.6 or earlier are all grandma and grandpa who only use Safari, Skype, and maybe some spreadsheet software for tax returns. For all I know, none of them use any Qt 5 based software. And why would they? They haven’t updated their system in years… But maybe I’m wrong, and I’d like to be proven so. So, can someone tell me what that 20% really means for Qt 5 and its developers? This is what it means for me. We are not that many working on the Mac port. I can think about 6-8 people, including me, and AFAIK none of us works 100% on the Mac port (I’d say the average is below 50%, so that’s 3-4 full-time people maximum). And the widgets Mac style code is a mess because we still support 10.6. And we can’t still use ARC because of 10.6 and some old Xcode version. And have you seen the CoreWLAN bear management plugin and how we support 10.6? Fullscreen mode hacks? Thank 10.6. Building WebKit and C++ 11, anyone? Don’t give me “But 20% market share” or “The XP of Apple” when the debate about ending support for 10.6 comes. Give me facts. Give me numbers that concern Qt 5. Give me reasons why we should keep parts of Qt in such unsatisfactory state. I only work on my little things, and 10.6 is a burden for me. So, you who work out there, that see people using Qt 5 apps, tell me, is it worth it? >>> >>> I wholeheartedly agree with Gabriel. >>> >>> We all are contributing to the Qt project - as opposed to private forks of >>> Qt - because we want to grow the overall success of Qt, we want it to >>> become even more popular among software developers. However we do have >>> limited resources, so when we decide to spend time on something, it is >>> very important to ask ourselves: How does for example working on 10.6 >>> contribute to the popularity of Qt compared to making it kick-ass on more >>> recent versions of Mac OS X? >>> >>> In my opinion the answer is crystal clear: We should provide first class >>> integration with the latest Mac OS X technologies / frameworks, we should >>> make life easier for application developers. I doubt that we can grow Qt >>> faster by looking to the past - the future of Qt is more tightly >>> connected to staying relevant and up-to-date with what's going on in the >>> rest of the software industry. >>> >>> >>> I personally like the suggestion brought up elsewhere of keeping things as >>> they are for Qt 5.3 and dropping 10.6 from the CI system and supported >>> platforms for 5.3 - while simultaneously reviewing and approving patches >>> by >>> other members of the community that continue to have an interest in 10.6 >>> support. >> >> I agree with many of these arguments, and I was in favor of setting the >> minimum supported version to 10.7 back when we started Qt 5 development. >> But we did make the decision
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 20/01/14 21:21 , deDietrich Gabriel wrote: [snip] > I only work on my little things, and 10.6 is a burden for me. So, you > who work out there, that see people using Qt 5 apps, tell me, is it > worth it? I'm 100% with Gabriel here. - The 20% marked share doesn't mean anything without details about how it relates to Qt end user deployments. - Even if all those 20% are running Qt based applications, we're still limited by the resources we have developing Qt. If given the choice between 10.6 continued support and excellent 10.9 support, I'd assume (hope) our customers would prefer the latter. My vote would be for dropping 10.6 support ASAP, meaning 5.4. tor arne ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 21/01/14 11:23 , Sorvig Morten wrote: > I agree with many of these arguments, and I was in favor of setting > the minimum supported version to 10.7 back when we started Qt 5 > development. But we did make the decision to support 10.6. The > implementation effort has been made and that decision should be > respected. I don't get this. Is this an argument for keeping 10.6 support until 6.0? Is the support matrix frozen once a x.0 release is out? If not, when do we drop support? tor arne ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On Tuesday 21. January 2014 09.32.45 Simon Hausmann wrote: [...] > I personally like the suggestion brought up elsewhere of keeping things as > they are for Qt 5.3 and dropping 10.6 from the CI system and supported > platforms for 5.3 - while simultaneously reviewing and approving patches by > other members of the community that continue to have an interest in 10.6 > support. As pointed out by Tor Arne, I meant 5.4 as suggested target version for dropping, not 5.3. Simon ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On Tuesday 21. January 2014 10.23.22 Sorvig Morten wrote: > On 21 Jan 2014, at 09:32, Simon Hausmann wrote: > > On Monday 20. January 2014 20.21.14 deDietrich Gabriel wrote: > >> On Jan 20, 2014, at 7:55 PM, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: > >>> On Monday 20 January 2014, Thiago Macieira wrote: > On segunda-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2014 17:36:26, Kurt Pattyn wrote: > > The CI system is still building for OSX 10.6. > > Given the fact that OSX is at version 10.9 now, shouldn’t the build > > for > > 10.6 be removed, and ideally replaced with a build for OSX 10.9? > > Only if we decide to stop supporting 10.6 entirely. So the question is: > do > we drop it? > > Mac devs, what say you? > >>> > >>> Could we drop support for build on 10.6, but still support it as runtime > >>> platform? That seems to be how Apple prefers to support older versions. > >>> The > >>> question is of course if out CI system would be able to handle building > >>> on > >>> 10.7 but running on 10.6 > >> > >> IIRC, this has been the official statement since Qt 5.0. And yet, for > >> some > >> reason, the CI is treating 10.6 as any other platform. > >> > >> If you do the math from the data available here > >> http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10 > >> &q > >> pcustomd=0 (that’s December 2013), 10.6 accounts for slightly less than > >> 20% > >> of all the OS X versions. Let’s suppose those numbers reflect the > >> reality. > >> > >> Is 20% a lot? I don’t know. Is that 20% the same proportion for Qt 5 > >> end-users? Or Qt 5 developers making a life out of it? Absolutely no > >> idea. > >> Do I see that many bugs reported on 10.6? No, not at all. > >> > >> The truth is, market share doesn’t mean anything. Point in case: > >> According > >> to the link above, OS X is less than 8% of the total market share. Should > >> we then drop the Mac port completely? > >> > >> For all I know, that twenty-something percent of Mac users running 10.6 > >> or > >> earlier are all grandma and grandpa who only use Safari, Skype, and maybe > >> some spreadsheet software for tax returns. For all I know, none of them > >> use > >> any Qt 5 based software. And why would they? They haven’t updated their > >> system in years… But maybe I’m wrong, and I’d like to be proven so. > >> > >> So, can someone tell me what that 20% really means for Qt 5 and its > >> developers? This is what it means for me. > >> > >> We are not that many working on the Mac port. I can think about 6-8 > >> people, > >> including me, and AFAIK none of us works 100% on the Mac port (I’d say > >> the > >> average is below 50%, so that’s 3-4 full-time people maximum). And the > >> widgets Mac style code is a mess because we still support 10.6. And we > >> can’t still use ARC because of 10.6 and some old Xcode version. And have > >> you seen the CoreWLAN bear management plugin and how we support 10.6? > >> Fullscreen mode hacks? Thank 10.6. Building WebKit and C++ 11, anyone? > >> > >> Don’t give me “But 20% market share” or “The XP of Apple” when the debate > >> about ending support for 10.6 comes. Give me facts. Give me numbers that > >> concern Qt 5. Give me reasons why we should keep parts of Qt in such > >> unsatisfactory state. > >> > >> I only work on my little things, and 10.6 is a burden for me. So, you who > >> work out there, that see people using Qt 5 apps, tell me, is it worth it? > > > > I wholeheartedly agree with Gabriel. > > > > We all are contributing to the Qt project - as opposed to private forks of > > Qt - because we want to grow the overall success of Qt, we want it to > > become even more popular among software developers. However we do have > > limited resources, so when we decide to spend time on something, it is > > very important to ask ourselves: How does for example working on 10.6 > > contribute to the popularity of Qt compared to making it kick-ass on more > > recent versions of Mac OS X? > > > > In my opinion the answer is crystal clear: We should provide first class > > integration with the latest Mac OS X technologies / frameworks, we should > > make life easier for application developers. I doubt that we can grow Qt > > faster by looking to the past - the future of Qt is more tightly > > connected to staying relevant and up-to-date with what's going on in the > > rest of the software industry. > > > > > > I personally like the suggestion brought up elsewhere of keeping things as > > they are for Qt 5.3 and dropping 10.6 from the CI system and supported > > platforms for 5.3 - while simultaneously reviewing and approving patches > > by > > other members of the community that continue to have an interest in 10.6 > > support. > > I agree with many of these arguments, and I was in favor of setting the > minimum supported version to 10.7 back when we started Qt 5 development. > But we did make the decision to support 10.6. The implementation effort has > been made
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 21 Jan 2014, at 09:32, Simon Hausmann wrote: > On Monday 20. January 2014 20.21.14 deDietrich Gabriel wrote: >> On Jan 20, 2014, at 7:55 PM, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: >>> On Monday 20 January 2014, Thiago Macieira wrote: On segunda-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2014 17:36:26, Kurt Pattyn wrote: > The CI system is still building for OSX 10.6. > Given the fact that OSX is at version 10.9 now, shouldn’t the build for > 10.6 be removed, and ideally replaced with a build for OSX 10.9? Only if we decide to stop supporting 10.6 entirely. So the question is: do we drop it? Mac devs, what say you? >>> >>> Could we drop support for build on 10.6, but still support it as runtime >>> platform? That seems to be how Apple prefers to support older versions. >>> The >>> question is of course if out CI system would be able to handle building on >>> 10.7 but running on 10.6 >> >> IIRC, this has been the official statement since Qt 5.0. And yet, for some >> reason, the CI is treating 10.6 as any other platform. >> >> If you do the math from the data available here >> http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&q >> pcustomd=0 (that’s December 2013), 10.6 accounts for slightly less than 20% >> of all the OS X versions. Let’s suppose those numbers reflect the reality. >> >> Is 20% a lot? I don’t know. Is that 20% the same proportion for Qt 5 >> end-users? Or Qt 5 developers making a life out of it? Absolutely no idea. >> Do I see that many bugs reported on 10.6? No, not at all. >> >> The truth is, market share doesn’t mean anything. Point in case: According >> to the link above, OS X is less than 8% of the total market share. Should >> we then drop the Mac port completely? >> >> For all I know, that twenty-something percent of Mac users running 10.6 or >> earlier are all grandma and grandpa who only use Safari, Skype, and maybe >> some spreadsheet software for tax returns. For all I know, none of them use >> any Qt 5 based software. And why would they? They haven’t updated their >> system in years… But maybe I’m wrong, and I’d like to be proven so. >> >> So, can someone tell me what that 20% really means for Qt 5 and its >> developers? This is what it means for me. >> >> We are not that many working on the Mac port. I can think about 6-8 people, >> including me, and AFAIK none of us works 100% on the Mac port (I’d say the >> average is below 50%, so that’s 3-4 full-time people maximum). And the >> widgets Mac style code is a mess because we still support 10.6. And we >> can’t still use ARC because of 10.6 and some old Xcode version. And have >> you seen the CoreWLAN bear management plugin and how we support 10.6? >> Fullscreen mode hacks? Thank 10.6. Building WebKit and C++ 11, anyone? >> >> Don’t give me “But 20% market share” or “The XP of Apple” when the debate >> about ending support for 10.6 comes. Give me facts. Give me numbers that >> concern Qt 5. Give me reasons why we should keep parts of Qt in such >> unsatisfactory state. >> >> I only work on my little things, and 10.6 is a burden for me. So, you who >> work out there, that see people using Qt 5 apps, tell me, is it worth it? > > I wholeheartedly agree with Gabriel. > > We all are contributing to the Qt project - as opposed to private forks of Qt > - because we want to grow the overall success of Qt, we want it to become > even > more popular among software developers. However we do have limited resources, > so when we decide to spend time on something, it is very important to ask > ourselves: How does for example working on 10.6 contribute to the popularity > of Qt compared to making it kick-ass on more recent versions of Mac OS X? > > In my opinion the answer is crystal clear: We should provide first class > integration with the latest Mac OS X technologies / frameworks, we should > make > life easier for application developers. I doubt that we can grow Qt faster by > looking to the past - the future of Qt is more tightly connected to staying > relevant and up-to-date with what's going on in the rest of the software > industry. > > > I personally like the suggestion brought up elsewhere of keeping things as > they are for Qt 5.3 and dropping 10.6 from the CI system and supported > platforms for 5.3 - while simultaneously reviewing and approving patches by > other members of the community that continue to have an interest in 10.6 > support. I agree with many of these arguments, and I was in favor of setting the minimum supported version to 10.7 back when we started Qt 5 development. But we did make the decision to support 10.6. The implementation effort has been made and that decision should be respected. Obviously it’s not going to stand forever, especially when seeing the strong opinions from the Qt on Mac developers. We are moving in the direction of not supporting 10.6. The 5.3 binary packages will not support it. QtWebkit lives its own li
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On Monday 20. January 2014 20.21.14 deDietrich Gabriel wrote: > On Jan 20, 2014, at 7:55 PM, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: > > On Monday 20 January 2014, Thiago Macieira wrote: > >> On segunda-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2014 17:36:26, Kurt Pattyn wrote: > >>> The CI system is still building for OSX 10.6. > >>> Given the fact that OSX is at version 10.9 now, shouldn’t the build for > >>> 10.6 be removed, and ideally replaced with a build for OSX 10.9? > >> > >> Only if we decide to stop supporting 10.6 entirely. So the question is: > >> do > >> we drop it? > >> > >> Mac devs, what say you? > > > > Could we drop support for build on 10.6, but still support it as runtime > > platform? That seems to be how Apple prefers to support older versions. > > The > > question is of course if out CI system would be able to handle building on > > 10.7 but running on 10.6 > > IIRC, this has been the official statement since Qt 5.0. And yet, for some > reason, the CI is treating 10.6 as any other platform. > > If you do the math from the data available here > http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&q > pcustomd=0 (that’s December 2013), 10.6 accounts for slightly less than 20% > of all the OS X versions. Let’s suppose those numbers reflect the reality. > > Is 20% a lot? I don’t know. Is that 20% the same proportion for Qt 5 > end-users? Or Qt 5 developers making a life out of it? Absolutely no idea. > Do I see that many bugs reported on 10.6? No, not at all. > > The truth is, market share doesn’t mean anything. Point in case: According > to the link above, OS X is less than 8% of the total market share. Should > we then drop the Mac port completely? > > For all I know, that twenty-something percent of Mac users running 10.6 or > earlier are all grandma and grandpa who only use Safari, Skype, and maybe > some spreadsheet software for tax returns. For all I know, none of them use > any Qt 5 based software. And why would they? They haven’t updated their > system in years… But maybe I’m wrong, and I’d like to be proven so. > > So, can someone tell me what that 20% really means for Qt 5 and its > developers? This is what it means for me. > > We are not that many working on the Mac port. I can think about 6-8 people, > including me, and AFAIK none of us works 100% on the Mac port (I’d say the > average is below 50%, so that’s 3-4 full-time people maximum). And the > widgets Mac style code is a mess because we still support 10.6. And we > can’t still use ARC because of 10.6 and some old Xcode version. And have > you seen the CoreWLAN bear management plugin and how we support 10.6? > Fullscreen mode hacks? Thank 10.6. Building WebKit and C++ 11, anyone? > > Don’t give me “But 20% market share” or “The XP of Apple” when the debate > about ending support for 10.6 comes. Give me facts. Give me numbers that > concern Qt 5. Give me reasons why we should keep parts of Qt in such > unsatisfactory state. > > I only work on my little things, and 10.6 is a burden for me. So, you who > work out there, that see people using Qt 5 apps, tell me, is it worth it? I wholeheartedly agree with Gabriel. We all are contributing to the Qt project - as opposed to private forks of Qt - because we want to grow the overall success of Qt, we want it to become even more popular among software developers. However we do have limited resources, so when we decide to spend time on something, it is very important to ask ourselves: How does for example working on 10.6 contribute to the popularity of Qt compared to making it kick-ass on more recent versions of Mac OS X? In my opinion the answer is crystal clear: We should provide first class integration with the latest Mac OS X technologies / frameworks, we should make life easier for application developers. I doubt that we can grow Qt faster by looking to the past - the future of Qt is more tightly connected to staying relevant and up-to-date with what's going on in the rest of the software industry. I personally like the suggestion brought up elsewhere of keeping things as they are for Qt 5.3 and dropping 10.6 from the CI system and supported platforms for 5.3 - while simultaneously reviewing and approving patches by other members of the community that continue to have an interest in 10.6 support. Simon ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 21 Jan 2014, at 8:01 AM, Sarajärvi Tony wrote: > You are talking about dropping 10.6 support, whereas we are dropping 10.7 as > well from the CI. > I know support and CI aren't the same thing, but you might want to object our > plan which as of now hasn't received any criticism. I'm surprised the "market share" for 10.7 is as low as it is and for 10.6 that it's so high. One of my macs at home, and my main mac at work, are both stuck on 10.7 because of old hardware. (At least the one at work can potentially upgrade if I buy it a new video card.) But why do people stay with 10.6? I was surprised that we dropped support for 10.5 years ago already, because anyone with a PPC machine is still stuck with it, and no version of Qt 5 was supported. Seems to me that 10.6 is probably as obsolete now as 10.5 was back then, but 10.7 might not be quite yet. At least I will probably continue testing 10.7 for a while even if CI doesn't, so it will begin to get frustrating if lots of bugs start to happen. (It's also possible that won't happen, since there aren't big kludges for 10.7 support AFAIK. Or maybe I will just buy the video card and upgrade.) I should point out again that it would be a good idea to always have some CI machines which use a case-sensitive filesystem, since otherwise I end up fixing bugs related to that. Case-sensitive is not the default when installing OS X, but since Linux is case-sensitive, it doesn't take much effort to keep it working on OSX too, as long as we get the CI feedback about it. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
> > > > > > On Jan 20, 2014, at 7:55 PM, Allan Sandfeld Jensen > > > wrote: > > > > > > > On Monday 20 January 2014, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > > >> On segunda-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2014 17:36:26, Kurt Pattyn wrote: > > > >>> The CI system is still building for OSX 10.6. > > > >>> Given the fact that OSX is at version 10.9 now, shouldn't the build > > > >>> for > > > >>> 10.6 be removed, and ideally replaced with a build for OSX 10.9? > > > >> > > > >> Only if we decide to stop supporting 10.6 entirely. So the question is: > do > > > >> we drop it? > > > >> > > > >> Mac devs, what say you? > > > > > > > > Could we drop support for build on 10.6, but still support it as runtime > > > > platform? That seems to be how Apple prefers to support older > versions. > > > The > > > > question is of course if out CI system would be able to handle building > on > > > > 10.7 but running on 10.6 > > > > > > > > > IIRC, this has been the official statement since Qt 5.0. And yet, for some > > > reason, the CI is treating 10.6 as any other platform. > > > > > > If you do the math from the data available here > > > http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market- > > > share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0 (that's December 2013), 10.6 > accounts > > > for slightly less than 20% of all the OS X versions. Let's suppose those > > > numbers reflect the reality. > > > > > > Is 20% a lot? I don't know. Is that 20% the same proportion for Qt 5 end- > > users? > > > Or Qt 5 developers making a life out of it? Absolutely no idea. Do I see > that > > > many bugs reported on 10.6? No, not at all. > > > > > > The truth is, market share doesn't mean anything. Point in case: > According > > to > > > the link above, OS X is less than 8% of the total market share. Should we > > then > > > drop the Mac port completely? > > > > > > For all I know, that twenty-something percent of Mac users running 10.6 > or > > > earlier are all grandma and grandpa who only use Safari, Skype, and > maybe > > > some spreadsheet software for tax returns. For all I know, none of them > > use > > > any Qt 5 based software. And why would they? They haven't updated > their > > > system in years. But maybe I'm wrong, and I'd like to be proven so. > > > > > > So, can someone tell me what that 20% really means for Qt 5 and its > > > developers? This is what it means for me. > > > > > > We are not that many working on the Mac port. I can think about 6-8 > > people, > > > including me, and AFAIK none of us works 100% on the Mac port (I'd say > > the > > > average is below 50%, so that's 3-4 full-time people maximum). And the > > > widgets Mac style code is a mess because we still support 10.6. And we > > can't > > > still use ARC because of 10.6 and some old Xcode version. And have you > > seen > > > the CoreWLAN bear management plugin and how we support 10.6? > > > Fullscreen mode hacks? Thank 10.6. Building WebKit and C++ 11, anyone? > > > > > > Don't give me "But 20% market share" or "The XP of Apple" when the > > debate > > > about ending support for 10.6 comes. Give me facts. Give me numbers > that > > > concern Qt 5. Give me reasons why we should keep parts of Qt in such > > > unsatisfactory state. > > > > > > I only work on my little things, and 10.6 is a burden for me. So, you who > > work > > > out there, that see people using Qt 5 apps, tell me, is it worth it? > > > > Have you noticed this thread http://lists.qt- > > project.org/pipermail/development/2014-January/015078.html ? > > > > You are talking about dropping 10.6 support, whereas we are dropping 10.7 > > as well from the CI. > > I know support and CI aren't the same thing, but you might want to object > > our plan which as of now hasn't received any criticism. > > > > Our 5.3 plan is here: > > https://wiki.it.local/display/QTCOM/Qt5.3+Supported+host+platforms > > > > And the public link: https://qt- > project.org/wiki/Qt_5_3_CI_packaging_RTA_environments Thank you :) I'll close that tab now. Second time I pasted the internal link by mistake ;) -Tony ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
> -Original Message- > From: development-bounces+andrew.knight=digia@qt-project.org > [mailto:development-bounces+andrew.knight=digia@qt-project.org] > On Behalf Of Sarajärvi Tony > Sent: 21 January 2014 09:02 > To: deDietrich Gabriel; development@qt-project.org > Subject: Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build? > > > > > On Jan 20, 2014, at 7:55 PM, Allan Sandfeld Jensen > > wrote: > > > > > On Monday 20 January 2014, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > >> On segunda-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2014 17:36:26, Kurt Pattyn wrote: > > >>> The CI system is still building for OSX 10.6. > > >>> Given the fact that OSX is at version 10.9 now, shouldn't the build for > > >>> 10.6 be removed, and ideally replaced with a build for OSX 10.9? > > >> > > >> Only if we decide to stop supporting 10.6 entirely. So the question is: > > >> do > > >> we drop it? > > >> > > >> Mac devs, what say you? > > > > > > Could we drop support for build on 10.6, but still support it as runtime > > > platform? That seems to be how Apple prefers to support older versions. > > The > > > question is of course if out CI system would be able to handle building on > > > 10.7 but running on 10.6 > > > > > > IIRC, this has been the official statement since Qt 5.0. And yet, for some > > reason, the CI is treating 10.6 as any other platform. > > > > If you do the math from the data available here > > http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market- > > share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0 (that's December 2013), 10.6 accounts > > for slightly less than 20% of all the OS X versions. Let's suppose those > > numbers reflect the reality. > > > > Is 20% a lot? I don't know. Is that 20% the same proportion for Qt 5 end- > users? > > Or Qt 5 developers making a life out of it? Absolutely no idea. Do I see > > that > > many bugs reported on 10.6? No, not at all. > > > > The truth is, market share doesn't mean anything. Point in case: According > to > > the link above, OS X is less than 8% of the total market share. Should we > then > > drop the Mac port completely? > > > > For all I know, that twenty-something percent of Mac users running 10.6 or > > earlier are all grandma and grandpa who only use Safari, Skype, and maybe > > some spreadsheet software for tax returns. For all I know, none of them > use > > any Qt 5 based software. And why would they? They haven't updated their > > system in years. But maybe I'm wrong, and I'd like to be proven so. > > > > So, can someone tell me what that 20% really means for Qt 5 and its > > developers? This is what it means for me. > > > > We are not that many working on the Mac port. I can think about 6-8 > people, > > including me, and AFAIK none of us works 100% on the Mac port (I'd say > the > > average is below 50%, so that's 3-4 full-time people maximum). And the > > widgets Mac style code is a mess because we still support 10.6. And we > can't > > still use ARC because of 10.6 and some old Xcode version. And have you > seen > > the CoreWLAN bear management plugin and how we support 10.6? > > Fullscreen mode hacks? Thank 10.6. Building WebKit and C++ 11, anyone? > > > > Don't give me "But 20% market share" or "The XP of Apple" when the > debate > > about ending support for 10.6 comes. Give me facts. Give me numbers that > > concern Qt 5. Give me reasons why we should keep parts of Qt in such > > unsatisfactory state. > > > > I only work on my little things, and 10.6 is a burden for me. So, you who > work > > out there, that see people using Qt 5 apps, tell me, is it worth it? > > Have you noticed this thread http://lists.qt- > project.org/pipermail/development/2014-January/015078.html ? > > You are talking about dropping 10.6 support, whereas we are dropping 10.7 > as well from the CI. > I know support and CI aren't the same thing, but you might want to object > our plan which as of now hasn't received any criticism. > > Our 5.3 plan is here: > https://wiki.it.local/display/QTCOM/Qt5.3+Supported+host+platforms > And the public link: https://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt_5_3_CI_packaging_RTA_environments ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
> > On Jan 20, 2014, at 7:55 PM, Allan Sandfeld Jensen > wrote: > > > On Monday 20 January 2014, Thiago Macieira wrote: > >> On segunda-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2014 17:36:26, Kurt Pattyn wrote: > >>> The CI system is still building for OSX 10.6. > >>> Given the fact that OSX is at version 10.9 now, shouldn't the build for > >>> 10.6 be removed, and ideally replaced with a build for OSX 10.9? > >> > >> Only if we decide to stop supporting 10.6 entirely. So the question is: do > >> we drop it? > >> > >> Mac devs, what say you? > > > > Could we drop support for build on 10.6, but still support it as runtime > > platform? That seems to be how Apple prefers to support older versions. > The > > question is of course if out CI system would be able to handle building on > > 10.7 but running on 10.6 > > > IIRC, this has been the official statement since Qt 5.0. And yet, for some > reason, the CI is treating 10.6 as any other platform. > > If you do the math from the data available here > http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market- > share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0 (that's December 2013), 10.6 accounts > for slightly less than 20% of all the OS X versions. Let's suppose those > numbers reflect the reality. > > Is 20% a lot? I don't know. Is that 20% the same proportion for Qt 5 > end-users? > Or Qt 5 developers making a life out of it? Absolutely no idea. Do I see that > many bugs reported on 10.6? No, not at all. > > The truth is, market share doesn't mean anything. Point in case: According to > the link above, OS X is less than 8% of the total market share. Should we then > drop the Mac port completely? > > For all I know, that twenty-something percent of Mac users running 10.6 or > earlier are all grandma and grandpa who only use Safari, Skype, and maybe > some spreadsheet software for tax returns. For all I know, none of them use > any Qt 5 based software. And why would they? They haven't updated their > system in years. But maybe I'm wrong, and I'd like to be proven so. > > So, can someone tell me what that 20% really means for Qt 5 and its > developers? This is what it means for me. > > We are not that many working on the Mac port. I can think about 6-8 people, > including me, and AFAIK none of us works 100% on the Mac port (I'd say the > average is below 50%, so that's 3-4 full-time people maximum). And the > widgets Mac style code is a mess because we still support 10.6. And we can't > still use ARC because of 10.6 and some old Xcode version. And have you seen > the CoreWLAN bear management plugin and how we support 10.6? > Fullscreen mode hacks? Thank 10.6. Building WebKit and C++ 11, anyone? > > Don't give me "But 20% market share" or "The XP of Apple" when the debate > about ending support for 10.6 comes. Give me facts. Give me numbers that > concern Qt 5. Give me reasons why we should keep parts of Qt in such > unsatisfactory state. > > I only work on my little things, and 10.6 is a burden for me. So, you who work > out there, that see people using Qt 5 apps, tell me, is it worth it? Have you noticed this thread http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2014-January/015078.html ? You are talking about dropping 10.6 support, whereas we are dropping 10.7 as well from the CI. I know support and CI aren't the same thing, but you might want to object our plan which as of now hasn't received any criticism. Our 5.3 plan is here: https://wiki.it.local/display/QTCOM/Qt5.3+Supported+host+platforms Br, -Tony ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On Jan 20, 2014, at 7:55 PM, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: > On Monday 20 January 2014, Thiago Macieira wrote: >> On segunda-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2014 17:36:26, Kurt Pattyn wrote: >>> The CI system is still building for OSX 10.6. >>> Given the fact that OSX is at version 10.9 now, shouldn’t the build for >>> 10.6 be removed, and ideally replaced with a build for OSX 10.9? >> >> Only if we decide to stop supporting 10.6 entirely. So the question is: do >> we drop it? >> >> Mac devs, what say you? > > Could we drop support for build on 10.6, but still support it as runtime > platform? That seems to be how Apple prefers to support older versions. The > question is of course if out CI system would be able to handle building on > 10.7 but running on 10.6 IIRC, this has been the official statement since Qt 5.0. And yet, for some reason, the CI is treating 10.6 as any other platform. If you do the math from the data available here http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0 (that’s December 2013), 10.6 accounts for slightly less than 20% of all the OS X versions. Let’s suppose those numbers reflect the reality. Is 20% a lot? I don’t know. Is that 20% the same proportion for Qt 5 end-users? Or Qt 5 developers making a life out of it? Absolutely no idea. Do I see that many bugs reported on 10.6? No, not at all. The truth is, market share doesn’t mean anything. Point in case: According to the link above, OS X is less than 8% of the total market share. Should we then drop the Mac port completely? For all I know, that twenty-something percent of Mac users running 10.6 or earlier are all grandma and grandpa who only use Safari, Skype, and maybe some spreadsheet software for tax returns. For all I know, none of them use any Qt 5 based software. And why would they? They haven’t updated their system in years… But maybe I’m wrong, and I’d like to be proven so. So, can someone tell me what that 20% really means for Qt 5 and its developers? This is what it means for me. We are not that many working on the Mac port. I can think about 6-8 people, including me, and AFAIK none of us works 100% on the Mac port (I’d say the average is below 50%, so that’s 3-4 full-time people maximum). And the widgets Mac style code is a mess because we still support 10.6. And we can’t still use ARC because of 10.6 and some old Xcode version. And have you seen the CoreWLAN bear management plugin and how we support 10.6? Fullscreen mode hacks? Thank 10.6. Building WebKit and C++ 11, anyone? Don’t give me “But 20% market share” or “The XP of Apple” when the debate about ending support for 10.6 comes. Give me facts. Give me numbers that concern Qt 5. Give me reasons why we should keep parts of Qt in such unsatisfactory state. I only work on my little things, and 10.6 is a burden for me. So, you who work out there, that see people using Qt 5 apps, tell me, is it worth it? Best regards, Dr. Gabriel de Dietrich Senior Software Developer qt.digia.com ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
> Le 21 Jan 2014 à 6:45 am, Olivier Goffart a écrit : > >> On Monday 20 January 2014 19:55:05 Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: >>> On Monday 20 January 2014, Thiago Macieira wrote: On segunda-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2014 17:36:26, Kurt Pattyn wrote: The CI system is still building for OSX 10.6. Given the fact that OSX is at version 10.9 now, shouldn’t the build for 10.6 be removed, and ideally replaced with a build for OSX 10.9? >>> >>> Only if we decide to stop supporting 10.6 entirely. So the question is: do >>> we drop it? >>> >>> Mac devs, what say you? >> >> Could we drop support for build on 10.6, but still support it as runtime >> platform? That seems to be how Apple prefers to support older versions. The >> question is of course if out CI system would be able to handle building on >> 10.7 but running on 10.6 > > > It is true that building on OSX 10.6 still require GCC 4.2 which is a bit old. > If it is possible to build with clang and target OSX 10.6 that would be great. > > We could revisit the supported compiler. > Personally, this would be my list: > GCC 4.5 / clang 3.1 / MSVC 2010 > > That way we could start using C++11 feature in Qt: such as 'auto', lambda > expressions, 'decltype', variadic macro, and more. > > If not for Qt 5.3, at least You can build with the latest clang and still target 10.6. The trick is to force the use of the gnu c++ standard library (-stdlib=libstdc++) because libc++ is only supported on > 10.7 but clang now tries to use it by default. That gives you (most) c++11 language features but not the stl support of it. I managed to use Qt in this manner, with some minor modifications to the clang mkspecs. I don't think I attempted to build it this way, but it should work. Sandy. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On segunda-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2014 20:45:50, Olivier Goffart wrote: > It is true that building on OSX 10.6 still require GCC 4.2 which is a bit > old. If it is possible to build with clang and target OSX 10.6 that would > be great. > > We could revisit the supported compiler. > Personally, this would be my list: > GCC 4.5 / clang 3.1 / MSVC 2010 Clang 3.1 on Linux? Or do you mean Clang-that-came-with-XCode 3.1? Or maybe Clang-that-came-with-XCode version closest to upstream Clang 3.1? The version numbers on Mac have nothing to do with the upstream version. Right now, Clang is reporting to be version 5.0 (that's XCode 5.0). Clang on Linux is of minor interest to our users, since they're more likely to use what comes with their distros and those standardise on GCC > That way we could start using C++11 feature in Qt: such as 'auto', lambda > expressions, 'decltype', variadic macro, and more. > > If not for Qt 5.3, at least Qt 5.4. That means dropping completely support for older compilers as well as commercial compilers from other OS that don't support those C++11 features yet. I don't think we can do that in 2014 yet. With luck, maybe by mid-2015 (which would be Qt 5.6). That said, you are allowed to write more efficient code and new features using those features. QUuid does that. I'm also using lambdas in QtCore: https://codereview.qt-project.org/74182 You just can't break the build if the feature isn't present. Not yet, anyway. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On Monday 20 January 2014 19:55:05 Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: > On Monday 20 January 2014, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > On segunda-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2014 17:36:26, Kurt Pattyn wrote: > > > The CI system is still building for OSX 10.6. > > > Given the fact that OSX is at version 10.9 now, shouldn’t the build for > > > 10.6 be removed, and ideally replaced with a build for OSX 10.9? > > > > Only if we decide to stop supporting 10.6 entirely. So the question is: do > > we drop it? > > > > Mac devs, what say you? > > Could we drop support for build on 10.6, but still support it as runtime > platform? That seems to be how Apple prefers to support older versions. The > question is of course if out CI system would be able to handle building on > 10.7 but running on 10.6 It is true that building on OSX 10.6 still require GCC 4.2 which is a bit old. If it is possible to build with clang and target OSX 10.6 that would be great. We could revisit the supported compiler. Personally, this would be my list: GCC 4.5 / clang 3.1 / MSVC 2010 That way we could start using C++11 feature in Qt: such as 'auto', lambda expressions, 'decltype', variadic macro, and more. If not for Qt 5.3, at least Qt 5.4. -- Olivier Woboq - Qt services and support - http://woboq.com - http://code.woboq.org ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On Mon, 2014-01-20 at 13:21 -0500, Jake Petroules wrote: > Well, as I said, it's very much "Apple's XP" -- we'd like to get rid > of it, and it's slowly on it's way out but still very much relevant to > keep around as a deployment target for the time being (just as XP is). http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0 10.9: 2.79% 10.8: 1.66% 10.7: 1.23% 10.6: 1.47% 10.5: 0.29% Normalized to just Mac OSX: 10.9: 37.5% 10.8: 22.3% 10.7: 16.7% 10.6: 19.8% 10.5: 3.9% >From those numbers it looks like it is indeed a little premature to end support for 10.6. -- Travis Allen BlackBerry - This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On Monday 20 January 2014, Thiago Macieira wrote: > On segunda-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2014 17:36:26, Kurt Pattyn wrote: > > The CI system is still building for OSX 10.6. > > Given the fact that OSX is at version 10.9 now, shouldn’t the build for > > 10.6 be removed, and ideally replaced with a build for OSX 10.9? > > Only if we decide to stop supporting 10.6 entirely. So the question is: do > we drop it? > > Mac devs, what say you? Could we drop support for build on 10.6, but still support it as runtime platform? That seems to be how Apple prefers to support older versions. The question is of course if out CI system would be able to handle building on 10.7 but running on 10.6 Regards `Allan ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
Well, as I said, it's very much "Apple's XP" -- we'd like to get rid of it, and it's slowly on it's way out but still very much relevant to keep around as a deployment target for the time being (just as XP is). Firefox and Chrome dropped support for 10.5 only relatively recently (late 2012?), I don't remember exactly when, but those are probably relatively good indicators of when to start dropping support for older platforms. -- Jake Petroules Chief Technology Officer Petroules Corporation · www.petroules.com Email: jake.petrou...@petroules.com On Jan 20, 2014, at 1:07 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote: > On segunda-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2014 13:01:22, Jake Petroules wrote: >> I say: definitely not, and Mac devs aren't the people to ask, the market >> share is. > > I'm asking the Mac devs because I expect that they know the pulse of the Mac > community. > >> Snow Leopard is being called "Apple's XP" for a good reason, and many >> (most?) popular apps continue to support 10.6 at this point. > > And we'd like to continue supporting Subsurface on 10.6, for example, if for > no other reason that one of our main devs does not have access to anything > higher. But I don't know whether that's representative or not. That's why I > passed the question along to the Mac devs. > > -- > Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com > Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center > ___ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On segunda-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2014 13:01:22, Jake Petroules wrote: > I say: definitely not, and Mac devs aren't the people to ask, the market > share is. I'm asking the Mac devs because I expect that they know the pulse of the Mac community. > Snow Leopard is being called "Apple's XP" for a good reason, and many > (most?) popular apps continue to support 10.6 at this point. And we'd like to continue supporting Subsurface on 10.6, for example, if for no other reason that one of our main devs does not have access to anything higher. But I don't know whether that's representative or not. That's why I passed the question along to the Mac devs. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 20 Jan 2014, at 18:52, André Somers wrote: > Hi, > >> Op 20 jan. 2014 om 17:36 heeft Kurt Pattyn het >> volgende geschreven: >> >> The CI system is still building for OSX 10.6. >> Given the fact that OSX is at version 10.9 now, shouldn’t the build for 10.6 >> be removed, and ideally replaced with a build for OSX 10.9? > Why should it be one to the exclusion of the other? Imho, it would make sense > to test against both the oldest and the newest version supported... The > again, I am not a test engineer. Okay, it should not be one or the other. It is just that 10.6 is quite old. However, I just found out that you can still order this version from the Apple Store: http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC573Z/A/mac-os-x-106-snow-leopard. Cheers, Kurt > > André > ___ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
I say: definitely not, and Mac devs aren't the people to ask, the market share is. Snow Leopard is being called "Apple's XP" for a good reason, and many (most?) popular apps continue to support 10.6 at this point. It will die eventually but it is not yet time. How about we reevaluate a few months after the release of OS X 10.10? -- Jake Petroules Chief Technology Officer Petroules Corporation · www.petroules.com Email: jake.petrou...@petroules.com On Jan 20, 2014, at 12:54 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote: > On segunda-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2014 17:36:26, Kurt Pattyn wrote: >> The CI system is still building for OSX 10.6. >> Given the fact that OSX is at version 10.9 now, shouldn’t the build for 10.6 >> be removed, and ideally replaced with a build for OSX 10.9? > > Only if we decide to stop supporting 10.6 entirely. So the question is: do we > drop it? > > Mac devs, what say you? > -- > Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com > Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center > ___ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On segunda-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2014 17:36:26, Kurt Pattyn wrote: > The CI system is still building for OSX 10.6. > Given the fact that OSX is at version 10.9 now, shouldn’t the build for 10.6 > be removed, and ideally replaced with a build for OSX 10.9? Only if we decide to stop supporting 10.6 entirely. So the question is: do we drop it? Mac devs, what say you? -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
Hi, > Op 20 jan. 2014 om 17:36 heeft Kurt Pattyn het > volgende geschreven: > > The CI system is still building for OSX 10.6. > Given the fact that OSX is at version 10.9 now, shouldn’t the build for 10.6 > be removed, and ideally replaced with a build for OSX 10.9? Why should it be one to the exclusion of the other? Imho, it would make sense to test against both the oldest and the newest version supported... The again, I am not a test engineer. André ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
On 20 Jan 2014, at 17:36, Kurt Pattyn wrote: > The CI system is still building for OSX 10.6. > Given the fact that OSX is at version 10.9 now, shouldn’t the build for 10.6 > be removed, and ideally replaced with a build for OSX 10.9? I’d prefer the CI to build for the oldest OS X version to be supported, because developers tend to have the newest release and neglect compatibility with older versions. -- Frank Osterfeld | frank.osterf...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH&Co KG, a KDAB Group company Tel. Germany +49-30-521325470, Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090 KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-independent software solutions ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
[Development] Remove OSX 10.6 Build?
The CI system is still building for OSX 10.6. Given the fact that OSX is at version 10.9 now, shouldn’t the build for 10.6 be removed, and ideally replaced with a build for OSX 10.9? Cheers, Kurt ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
