Attn plugin developers: calibre moving to Qt 5

[JimmXinu]

Originally Posted by DoctorOhh

...
Extract ISBN
...

I'd been thinking about it anyway: Extract ISBN Qt5

[DoctorOhh]

Originally Posted by JimmXinu

I'd been thinking about it anyway: Extract ISBN Qt5

That was fast.

Thanks.

[kovidgoyal]

I have uploaded version 1.204 which includes all the changes from this weeks main calibre release.

I also added a source tarball in case there is anyone that wants to build it from source.

http://download.calibre-ebook.com/betas/

[theducks]

Originally Posted by kovidgoyal

I have uploaded version 1.204 which includes all the changes from this weeks main calibre release.

I also added a source tarball in case there is anyone that wants to build it from source.

http://download.calibre-ebook.com/betas/

204.1 on XP
The editor now says (incorrectly) 'No problems' found on Launch ('T' key) instead of the 'Check not run'

[Jellby]

The Prince PDF plugin should be Qt5-compatible now too.

[stanking]

Now that the Qt5 transition event is over with most plugins using the new version, is there any reason to continue using the try...Qt5...except...Qt4 code block? Is Qt4 needed for backward compatibility for new plugins, or just for those updating older plugins?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by stanking

Now that the Qt5 transition event is over with most plugins using the new version, is there any reason to continue using the try...Qt5...except...Qt4 code block? Is Qt4 needed for backward compatibility for new plugins, or just for those updating older plugins?

The backwards comparability is needed because Calibre 2.x won't run on Windows XP and some old version of OS X. So those people will either have to upgrade their OS and/or computer or stick with Calibre 1.48. So yes, because there are people still running 1.48, backwards comparability is important.

[PeterT]

Originally Posted by stanking

Now that the Qt5 transition event is over with most plugins using the new version, is there any reason to continue using the try...Qt5...except...Qt4 code block? Is Qt4 needed for backward compatibility for new plugins, or just for those updating older plugins?

Some developers have decided NOT to support the calibre 1.48 code base and have already removed the try / except block from their code.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by PeterT

Some developers have decided NOT to support the calibre 1.48 code base and have already removed the try / except block from their code.

Which (IMHO) is rather callous.

[eschwartz]

Just backwards compatibility, on the reasoning that there is no good reason to cut off support for old versions simply because you can, and because some people are legitimately stuck on old versions... although if you need to use Qt5-only features in order to make the plugin more useful, there is no reason to cripple it just for backwards compatibility -- and it isn't callous to do so.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Just backwards compatibility, on the reasoning that there is no good reason to cut off support for old versions simply because you can, and because some people are legitimately stuck on old versions... although if you need to use Qt5-only features in order to make the plugin more useful, there is no reason to cripple it just for backwards compatibility -- and it isn't callous to do so.

But it is callous when backwards compatibility is removed for no other reason then you can do so. I fully understand when you cannot use Qt4 do to something in the plugin not working with Qt4. But if there's no reason it won't work with Qt4, then (IMHO) there's no real reason to remove (or not add in) Qt4 compatibility.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But it is callous when backwards compatibility is removed for no other reason then you can do so. I fully understand when you cannot use Qt4 do to something in the plugin not working with Qt4. But if there's no reason it won't work with Qt4, then (IMHO) there's no real reason to remove (or not add in) Qt4 compatibility.

Do you ALSO fully understand that at no point did I actually disagree with you?

I strongly suspect you are talking merely to hear yourself talk.

[BetterRed]

For the record - this is what I had to say elsewhere on the matter Calibre 1.48...Continue Updating Plugins?

eschwartz & JSWolf perhaps you can take your childish squabbling to a pre-teens chat site.

BR

[stanking]

Thanks for the feedback, guys. I'm coming at this starting a new plugin (as opposed to updating an established one) and I'm new to Calibre development, Python, and Qt. I wouldn't remove code just to cut off those who don't update, but I'm not going to waste time trying make my code available for XP. It's an OS I loved, but was released 13 years ago and is no longer safe nor supported by Microsoft, and the need to replace my debit card this month because Home Depot was too cheap to update their systems has soured me on it. And since these plugin developers are providing their talents for free, "callous" is inappropriate. Thanks, @BetterRed, your link was very helpful.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by stanking

Thanks for the feedback, guys. I'm coming at this starting a new plugin (as opposed to updating an established one) and I'm new to Calibre development, Python, and Qt. I wouldn't remove code just to cut off those who don't update, but I'm not going to waste time trying make my code available for XP. It's an OS I loved, but was released 13 years ago and is no longer safe nor supported by Microsoft, and the need to replace my debit card this month because Home Depot was too cheap to update their systems has soured me on it. And since these plugin developers are providing their talents for free, "callous" is inappropriate. Thanks, @BetterRed, your link was very helpful.

It's not coding for XP. It's coding for people who have not yet moved to Calibre 2.x according to the stats, almost 5.3% have moved to Calibre 2.x. That leave more then 1/2 still using a Qt4 version. That's the reason to still support pre 2.0 when you can.