#49721: dangerous bug in Qt5 --------------------------+------------------------ Reporter: rjvbertin@… | Owner: mcalhoun@… Type: defect | Status: assigned Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: Resolution: | Keywords: Port: qt5 | --------------------------+------------------------ Comment (by mcalhoun@…): Replying to [comment:11 rjvbertin@…]:
You don't get it... I do appreciate you taking the time to patiently explain it.
The patch is indeed substantial, and that's the very reason why it won't be considered upstream until there's real-world evidence to show that it has been tested and works as advertised, without side-effects etc. I am a full supporter of cutting edge experimentation but only in some sort of -devel port.[[BR]] Personally, I use Qt for my work and need at least one non-experimental version around.
And once it is incorporated there's no more use to incorporate it in MacPorts ... Perhaps this is the point of confusion.[[BR]] When I say merged, I mean merged into the git repository that Qt uses for development.[[BR]] I do not mean released.[[BR]] If you look at certain changes ([https://codereview.qt- project.org/#/c/140876/ 140876], [https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/125968/ 125968], [https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/127759/ 127759] to name just a few), they have been merged but not released.[[BR]] In fact, it may be quite some time (months) before they are released, but since they have been vetted and approved by upstream developers, they are excellent candidates for patchfiles.[[BR]] For those types of changes, there is indeed great use in incorporating them into MacPorts.[[BR]] In fact, Qt will not fully build on El Capitan without at least [https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/127759/ one of them].
-- Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/49721#comment:12> MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/> Ports system for OS X