F41 Change Proposal: LXQt 2.0 (self-contained)

Project Discussion Change Proposals
,
1

LXQt 2.0

This is a proposed Change for Fedora Linux.
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.

Wiki
Announced

:link: Summary

Upgrade LXQt in Fedora to version 2.0.

:link: Owner

:link: Detailed Description

LXQt in Fedora will be upgraded to v2.0, which notably ports the whole desktop to Qt 6 and adds experimental Wayland support.

More details on LXQt 2.0 are available from the upstream release announcement.

:link: Feedback

:link: Benefit to Fedora

Fedora includes the latest version of LXQt and one less desktop depending on Qt 5, which is EOL.

:link: Scope

  • Proposal owners: Upgrade all related LXQt packages

  • Other developers: N/A

  • Release engineering: #12207

  • Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)

  • Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)

  • Alignment with the Fedora Strategy: N/A

:link: Upgrade/compatibility impact

Users will be upgraded from LXQt 1.x to 2.0, though no major configuration or user experience changes are expected.

:link: How To Test

Install using the spin, netinstall or DVD. Or upgrade from older release. Then users should be able to test by doing any daily work.

:link: User Experience

The user experience is not expected to change, other than it may be even lighter on system resources than before due to the change from Qt 5 to Qt 6.

:link: Dependencies

None outside of this Change.

:link: Contingency Plan

  • Contingency mechanism: Roll back the LXQt packages. It will require an Epoch bump.
  • Contingency deadline: Beta freeze
  • Blocks release? No.

:link: Documentation

N/A (not a System Wide Change)

:link: Release Notes

LXQt in Fedora has been upgraded to version 2.0, built on Qt 6.

Last edited by @amoloney 2024-07-17T20:57:45Z

Last edited by @amoloney 2024-07-17T20:57:45Z

2 Likes
2

How do you feel about the proposal as written?

  • Strongly in favor
  • In favor, with reservations
  • Neutral
  • Opposed, but could be convinced
  • Strongly opposed
0 voters

If you are in favor but have reservations, or are opposed but something could change your mind, please explain in a reply.

We want everyone to be heard, but many posts repeating the same thing actually makes that harder. If you have something new to say, please say it. If, instead, you find someone has already covered what you’d like to express, please simply give that post a :heart: instead of reiterating. You can even do this by email, by replying with the heart emoji or just “+1”. This will make long topics easier to follow.

Please note that this is an advisory “straw poll” meant to gauge sentiment. It isn’t a vote or a scientific survey. See About the Change Proposals category for more about the Change Process and moderation policy.

3

This change proposal has now been submitted to FESCo with ticket #3258 for voting.

To find out more, please visit our Changes Policy documentation.

1 Like
4

I am curious, why would following upstream version upgrades require a change proposal? Same for GNOME 46 and KDE Plasma 6.

In all these cases the older desktops are not supported anymore. Kubuntu for example need to do that on their own.

Isnt following upstream when released a core principle of Fedora?

5

Sure, but a change is still useful for:

  • coordination. If something updates a bunch of packages, it allows
    maintainers of other packages to see / know it’s happening and allow
    them to know who is driving it and that they need to adjust their
    packages.

  • marketing: allow users to know there’s a new version and that they
    might want to look at the changes when they move to the new fedora
    version.

Of course you don’t want a change for every package update, but for
larger things like desktops or critical/very popular apps that change a
lot, it can be helpful.

1 Like
6

Thanks!

I just remembered that this is done for every bigger package, so yeah that makes totally sense

7

This change has been accepted by FESCo for Fedora Linux 41. A full list of approved changes to date can be found on the Change Set Page.

To find out more about how our changes policy works, please visit our docs site.