Re: Decommissioning Qt 5 CI

--0000000000000935260657aa4d38
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 11:21=E2=80=AFPM Nicolas Fella <[email protected]=
e> wrote:

> On 28/07/2026 12:52, Ben Cooksley wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > For some time now Qt 5 has been in extended maintenance / support,
> > which Iif my understanding is correct has now come to an end.
> >
> > Accordingly, given that all of our applications have now had a
> > substantial amount of time to migrate, and plenty of notice that CI
> > would be withdrawn eventually, i'd like to proceed with withdrawing CI
> > support for Qt 5.
> >
> > This will free up valuable space on the CI nodes and allow us to
> > remove an image that is under very minimal, if any, maintenance.
> >
> > Please let me know if there are any objections.
>
> Hi,
>
> for applications I agree to drop Qt5 CI. The few usages that are left
> either already have Qt6 CI, or are more or less dead projects.
>

Correct.


>
> That said, we have a number of (Plasma) components that we still build
> for Qt5 for (external) application compatibility (breeze,
> plasma-integration, etc). So far we have not made a decision to stop
> doing that, and I'd rather not lose CI for those. That doesn't mean we


From my understanding distributions are stripping Qt 5 support out fairly
quickly, so i'd be inclined to end support for Qt 5 in those Plasma
components, and for distributions still shipping Qt 5 ask them to keep
building the last release of those components that supported Qt 5.


>
> need Qt5 CI in the current form. Could we use a distribution image with
> Qt and the few necessary libraries/frameworks baked in? That would be a
> much smaller image and easier to maintain than the current suse-qt515
> image.
>

CI images even with things baked in have a degree of cost associated with
them as distributions drop packages / change package names (ignoring the
storage requirements for those images).

Do those components have promises not to use fancy new C++ features, etc
that often require modern, up to date compilers that wouldn't necessarily
be featured in a stable distribution?


>
> Cheers
>
> Nico
>
>
Cheers,
Ben

--0000000000000935260657aa4d38
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><span style=3D"background-color:transpare=
nt">On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 11:21=E2=80=AFPM Nicolas Fella &lt;<a href=3D"m=
ailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a>&gt; wrote:</span></div=
><div class=3D"gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><blockquote class=3D"gmai=
l_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,20=
4,204);padding-left:1ex">On 28/07/2026 12:52, Ben Cooksley wrote:<br>
&gt; Hi all,<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; For some time now Qt 5 has been in extended maintenance=C2=A0/ support=
, <br>
&gt; which Iif my understanding is correct has now come to an end.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Accordingly, given that all of our applications have now had a <br>
&gt; substantial amount of time to migrate, and plenty of notice that CI <b=
r>
&gt; would be withdrawn eventually, i&#39;d like to proceed with withdrawin=
g CI <br>
&gt; support for Qt 5.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; This will free up valuable space=C2=A0on the CI nodes and allow us to =
<br>
&gt; remove an image that is under very minimal, if any, maintenance.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Please let me know if there are any objections.<br>
<br>
Hi,<br>
<br>
for applications I agree to drop Qt5 CI. The few usages that are left <br>
either already have Qt6 CI, or are more or less dead projects.<br></blockqu=
ote><div><br></div><div>Correct.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D=
"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(2=
04,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<br>
That said, we have a number of (Plasma) components that we still build <br>
for Qt5 for (external) application compatibility (breeze, <br>
plasma-integration, etc). So far we have not made a decision to stop <br>
doing that, and I&#39;d rather not lose CI for those. That doesn&#39;t mean=
 we</blockquote><div><br></div><div>From my understanding distributions are=
 stripping Qt 5 support out fairly quickly, so i&#39;d be inclined to end s=
upport for Qt 5 in those Plasma components, and for distributions still shi=
pping Qt 5 ask them to keep building the last release of those components t=
hat supported Qt 5.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote"=
 style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);p=
adding-left:1ex"> <br>
need Qt5 CI in the current form. Could we use a distribution image with <br=
>
Qt and the few necessary libraries/frameworks baked in? That would be a <br=
>
much smaller image and easier to maintain than the current suse-qt515 <br>
image.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><span style=3D"background-color:=
transparent">CI images even with things baked in have a degree of cost asso=
ciated with them as distributions drop packages / change package names (ign=
oring the storage requirements for those images).</span></div><div><span st=
yle=3D"background-color:transparent"><br></span></div><div><span style=3D"b=
ackground-color:transparent">Do those components have promises not to use f=
ancy new C++ features, etc that often require modern, up to date compilers =
that wouldn&#39;t necessarily be featured in a stable distribution?</span><=
/div><div><span style=3D"background-color:transparent">=C2=A0</span></div><=
blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-l=
eft:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Cheers<br>
<br>
Nico<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Ben=C2=A0</div></div=
></div>

--0000000000000935260657aa4d38--