Date: Mon, 28 May 2018 21:34:47 -0700 From: Yuri <yuri@freebsd.org> To: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org>, Sean Bruno <sbruno@freebsd.org> Cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r471061 - head/audio/qjackctl Message-ID: <a8a20565-8625-8286-00e7-5f0e05a28264@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20180529023326.GA20771@FreeBSD.org> References: <201805281845.w4SIj8bO065379@repo.freebsd.org> <985846ee-dce7-d8f1-2813-0a28bc36217e@freebsd.org> <a328123e-8f85-6d68-1d9d-b7454b53fe25@freebsd.org> <5dddd567-3439-caa3-56d0-665a40bdbf35@freebsd.org> <77503afc-b631-ac32-a87b-c8a28e0bb2ab@freebsd.org> <d42ac45a-2357-630a-8a0d-6864f271d4a9@freebsd.org> <20180529023326.GA20771@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 05/28/18 19:33, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > That's exactly the right approach here: leave both options, let the user > choose. I'm still defaulting my ports to Qt4 (at least trying to), and > sometimes even provide -qt4 as a separate port. I'm perfectly happy with > Qt4, less happy with Qt5, and see no need to use Qt5. But I'm just as > happy with Qt5 being default*as long as* I can tell the port that I want > Qt4 instead. > > Removing working option just because it's not useful for you Yuri is not > your best act here, esp. after you've been explicitly asked for it. You didn't show that sticking to Qt4 is specifically useful for anybody for valid reasons though. You only stated your dislike of Qt5 without reasons. Please show that switch of the app to Qt5 actually harms anybody, causes them loss of time, functionality, pain or suffering, or any other adverse consequences. So far all I see is that all the apps that I use work in Qt5 the same way or better than in Qt4. Yuri
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?a8a20565-8625-8286-00e7-5f0e05a28264>