Re: Removal of QCAD
On Mon, 2011-04-25 at 19:34 -0400, Scott Howard wrote:
> Hello debian-science,
>
> The qt3 libraries are in the process of being removed from Wheezy,
> which means QCAD will be removed from Wheezy [1]. A new project took
> the qcad code, ported to qt4, and has added new features (autosave,
> DWG support, updated translations, new icons). LibreCAD just was
> accepted to main this week.
>
> qcad is quite popular, with a popcon score over 2500. Should we keep
> qcad as a transitional package to depend on librecad (since it is the
> same code base), or let users find it on their own?
I'm inclined to recommend keeping a transitional package. It can be
distressing to find your software has disappeared without trace.
> Pros to qcad depending on librecad:
> - Same code base, look, feel, and commands. (Debian packaging is also
> nearly identical)
> - LibreCAD supports all file types qcad did (and possibly more soon)
>
> Cons to qcad depending on librecad:
> - upstream qcad could resurrect itself and release again (it hasn't
> since 2005, we've been using a patched version called qcad-free which
> hasn't had a new release since 2007)
I don't think this would be a problem. You'd then just replace the
transitional package with the actual package. I imagine there wouldn't
be conflicts between qcad and librecad but if there are we have the
Conflicts: mechanism.
> - librecad could have bugs from porting to qt4, there may be a drop in
> stability for users until they are worked out (although librecad has
> been in beta testing for 6 months or so already)
That's unfortunate of course, but its no loss in service compared with
not having qcad installed at all.
Or do you mean, in regards to not using a transitional package, that
you'd thereby enable users to keep the old installation of qcad and keep
using it even though it's removed from the Debian archives? That could
be a valid option if you think librecad is not sufficient as a drop-in
replacement.
Drew
Reply to: