On 28/11/2007, Alan Coopersmith <alan.coopersmith at sun.com> wrote: > Joseph Kowalski wrote: > >> 3.1. Interface Stability > >> > >> QT3 maintains API and ABI compatibility between Minor and Micro > >> Releases [ not between Major Releases ]. However, development > >> of QT3 has ceased, and QT3 is considered EOL by Trolltech ASA. [3] > >> For this reason, this case proposes an overall "Obsolete" > >> Interface Stability Classification for QT3. There are no plans > >> for ongoing Minor/Micro Release updates to this version of QT3, > >> except for routine patch maintenance updates, as required > > Deja Vu... > > > > This doesn't seem to be the first time I've seen proposals for "stale" > > objects/facilities. > > Somewhat amusingly, the LSB list this week is discussing removing Qt3 from > the next version of the LSB, because apps will have had 6 years to migrate > to Qt4, and "6 years are enough for all Qt3 apps to disappear. 6 years are > ages in IT." (I'd love these guys to meet the customers still running > OpenLook apps on current Solaris that they compiled on Solaris 2.4 in 1995.) > > (LSB thread starts at: > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/lsb-discuss/2007-November/004387.html > )
Like that matters; the LSB is completely irrelevant to most GNU/Linux customers. It doesn't guarantee squat really. The only one that seems to care about it are vendors that run around crowing about their LSB support. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall
