Pinentry for Qt4 still needed?

[Damien Goutte-Gattat]

Hi,

On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 10:55:34AM +0200, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
>I'm currently working on (usability) improvements for pinentry-qt and 
>I'm wondering whether pinentry-qt still needs to build with Qt4 or 
>whether we can drop support for Qt4

For what it’s worth [1], my take on this is that by now support for Qt4 
should be on a "best-effort" basis. That is, as long as continuing to 
support Qt4 is not too much of a hassle, we might as well do it, but if 
it becomes a burden (and, in particular, if it starts to get in the way 
of usability improvements), I wouldn't have too many qualms about 
dropping it.

(The only GNU/Linux distribution I know of that still does not provide 
Qt5 is the last release of Slackware (14.2, released in 2016), and even 
though I am a proud Slacker, I wouldn’t be too concerned about it. Many 
Slackers use -current (where Qt5 is available), and for those that still 
use 14.2, they have other problems – such as the fact that they are 
basically stuck with GnuPG 2.0…)


> and slowly start to add support for Qt6.

I believe this should be quite uncontroversial.

Regards,

- Damien

[1] Even though I did the last release of pinentry, my contributions to 
GnuPG recently have alas been few and far between, so don’t take my 
words as those of a maintainer. It’s only the opinion of a (very) 
irregular contributor.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-devel/attachments/20210714/72c6c5ee/attachment.sig>