Re: Qt 6 on X32 and HPPA ports: upstream requiring proof of usage

> On 2 Feb 2023, at 17:44, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Paul!
> 
> El jueves, 2 de febrero de 2023 14:35:40 -03 John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> escribió:
>> Hi Lisandro!
>> 
>> On Thu, 2023-02-02 at 13:48 -0300, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
> wrote:
>>> Upstream has just required us for a proof that Qt 6 is being in use in
>>> your
>>> ports:
>>> 
>>> <https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtbase/+/437349/comments/
>>> cb357b65_46e7edcd>
>>> 
>>> If the outcome is "not working" or "not really being in use"  they will
>>> probably remove support from upstream's source code.
>>> 
>>> What is the current status of Qt 6 in your ports? Can you supply an image
>>> of Qt 6 working on them?
>> 
>> I'm not sure what they consider »support«, there are some pre-processor
>> definitions in the code which hardly can be considered a maintenance
>> burden. Or are they going to start adding large chunks of
>> architecture-specific code? Not sure I understand the motivation behind the
>> question.
> 
> Pruning whatever code they do not test on the CI and does not has active
> users, no matter how short/long it can be.

At https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qbs/qbs/+/437296/comments/9b34cbab_87ced2e4, someone
suggested adding cross HPPA (and maybe others) to their Docker setup. That could be a start.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iNUEARYKAH0WIQQlpruI3Zt2TGtVQcJzhAn1IN+RkAUCY9v8MV8UgAAAAAAuAChp
c3N1ZXItZnByQG5vdGF0aW9ucy5vcGVucGdwLmZpZnRoaG9yc2VtYW4ubmV0MjVB
NkJCODhERDlCNzY0QzZCNTU0MUMyNzM4NDA5RjUyMERGOTE5MAAKCRBzhAn1IN+R
kGMOAQDWT1nXyejZdbMBYuVObzxzRySr84zoqUSLIaLzA/7fegD9FdlplKfopsA4
9oYKsBklcJCP/R0TYDOqA+0cH8nKIgo=
=tlWp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----