QElectroTech — Qt 6.0 development and qelectrotech

Re: Qt 6.0 development and qelectrotech

null@example.com (scorpio810) — Sun, 08 Mar 2026 16:11:11 +0000

Salut Joshua,
tout d'abord bravo à tous ceux qui y contribué: plc-user, elevatormind, vadoola Joshua, etc...

Après quelques petits tests sur mes anciens fichiers ici chez moi, cela me semble bien fonctionner en Qt6 aussi bien qu'avec Qt5, bravo a tous ceux qui y on contribués.!

Comme l'a fait remarqué plc-user: un projet sauvegardé avec une version Qt6, s'il on l"ouvre malencontreusement plus tard avec une ancienne version de QET en Qt5 les polices textes fonctionnent autrement et peuvent rendre le projet difficile à lire ou travailler.
[faut que je retrouve le post de plc-user]

Il est donc obligatoire d"incrémenter la version de QET quand on fera le merge, afin d'avertir l"utilisateur!

De mon coté par manque de temps et une santé précaire, je n'ai encore rien préparé pour tous les scripts et environnements de packaging avec Qt6.... : "Windows, macOS x86, aarch64, Debian stable, unstable x86, AppImage x86 and arm64, flatpak, PPA and Snap packages... "

Je rappelle que Qt5 a été annoncée "end or life" par Qt eux mêmes il y a un an il me semble... et que depuis cette année les distributions Linux ne prendront petit a petit plus Qt5 en charge, il donc urgent pour nous de migrer sur la dernière version du framework Qt6..

pour la sécurité (fail zero day), corrigé que sur les versions dites: Qt5 pro!
Soit la version payante pour les très grosses entreprises!

Du coté de l'open source de Qt5 ces patchs ne seront disponibles qu' une fois cette nouvelle version sera declarée open-source, donc en résumé: elle ne sera libérée et disponible q"un an plus tard, au contraire de Qt6 ou les versions seront patchées rapidement.

Pour re tester de mon coté les avancées des frameworks Qt6+ Webassembly qui ont bien progressé depuis 2022, afin de tester voir travailler sur une version SaaS ?
Pour les novices, SaaS: est une version de QET installable sur un serveur web ou d'entreprise tournant dans un navigateur web.
* Tres souvent demandé par de nombreux investisseurs.

Re: Qt 6.0 development and qelectrotech

null@example.com (Joshua) — Mon, 02 Mar 2026 22:04:08 +0000

Hello everyone,
qelectrotech can now be easily build under windows with Qt6 and cmake.
The changes made to do so are also benefit for the build under linux.
Please before merge to master can you test it and report any problem.
The branch is named msys2. I add documentations (in french, but easily understandable for other languages) accessible here :
https://github.com/qelectrotech/qelectr … d_msys2.md

The documentation is managed by git, feel free to create a new one in English (in a new folder named 'en' please). The readme.md ( https://github.com/qelectrotech/qelectr … /README.md ) have now a link to this documentation under the section development.

Re: Qt 6.0 development and qelectrotech

null@example.com (Joshua) — Tue, 27 Jan 2026 22:41:18 +0000

Hello everyone, I created a new branch named qt6_cmake_joshua based on the current master at the date of 27/01/2026 (and the work of plc_user in branch qt6-cmake) available on our git repository.
It compil well (with qt6 and kf6). There is a lot of things who doesn't work probably due to change make by Qt6, but it's a good start I think.

Tested under my debian sid and a fresh ubuntu 25.04 vm.

Dependency :

sudo apt install git qtcreator cmake qt6-tools-dev qt6-svg-dev libsqlite3-dev libkf6coreaddons-dev extra-cmake-modules libkf6widgetsaddons-dev

Re: Qt 6.0 development and qelectrotech

null@example.com (scorpio810) — Thu, 08 Jan 2026 10:16:45 +0000

vadoola wrote:

Another random note, last I looked the most recent git version when trying to use the DXF importer links to Antonio's github to download dxf2elmt. It's probably worth updating to mine so people are being pointed at the most up to date version of dxf2elmt. Since my laptop died right before I went on holiday, I'm not in a good spot to try and submit a pull request with the update myself right now, but perhaps I can get to it next week when I'm back unless someone wants to update it in the mean time.

Hi Carl, done.

Best regards,
Laurent

Re: Qt 6.0 development and qelectrotech

null@example.com (plc-user) — Wed, 07 Jan 2026 20:05:33 +0000

Joshua wrote:

Why remove kautosavefile and kwidgetaddon (...)? Have I missed something?

It's sad that elevatormind is no longer participating here!
He contributed several pull requests for eliminating KF5/KF6 and introduced a number of changes to QETs code to compile/work under Qt6, which he also explained and described here in the forum.

Re: Qt 6.0 development and qelectrotech

null@example.com (vadoola) — Tue, 06 Jan 2026 17:04:10 +0000

I know there has been talk about cutting a new release, and whether it should be done once ported to Qt6 or before.

Considering the number of changes since the last official release, I would be in favor of making a release now before the Qt6 port, and then another once the port to Qt6 is done.

Another random note, last I looked the most recent git version when trying to use the DXF importer links to Antonio's github to download dxf2elmt. It's probably worth updating to mine so people are being pointed at the most up to date version of dxf2elmt. Since my laptop died right before I went on holiday, I'm not in a good spot to try and submit a pull request with the update myself right now, but perhaps I can get to it next week when I'm back unless someone wants to update it in the mean time.

Re: Qt 6.0 development and qelectrotech

null@example.com (vadoola) — Tue, 06 Jan 2026 16:58:21 +0000

Joshua wrote:

Hello, during my vacation I tested switching to qt6 and kf6 on a new branch based on the master (with a mix of commits from the qt6 cmake branch). It's not quite finished yet, but it's coming along nicely. However, I have no problems with the KF6 libraries. Why remove kautosavefile and kwidgetaddon, only to reimplement them ourselves? I don't see the point. I would much rather keep code from KF6, which has been extensively corrected and tested, than reinvent the wheel. Have I missed something?

Hi Joshua,

As a whole I agreed, the KF6 libraries are pretty well tested and if they can be used instead of re-implementing them it makes sense. Why take on the extra work and possibly introduce bugs, if it's not necessary.

My main question here comes down to Windows. As I understand it KF6 can build on Windows, but I haven't succeeded yet. I was trying to get QET building on my Windows based work machine to see what I could do to help with the Qt 6 progress. The sticking point was KF6, the Windows build instructions that have been mentioned in the forum use vcpkg. Vcpkg only has KF5, and I found some issues and forum posts, it doesn't look like KF6 is coming to vcpkg any time soon. I started looking into getting KDE Craft set up so I could compile KF6 on Windows and maybe getting it working with a Qt6 version of QET, but didn't get it working before I went on vacation (I didn't bring my Windows based work laptop with me, and I won't be back for another few days).

If I recall correctly Laurent said somewhere in the forums that the official Windows release is cross-compiled from Linux. If that is the case, and it's working fine with Qt6 and KF6, than perhaps getting QET and KF6 building directly on Windows isn't that big of a deal, although I think it would be nice to actually be able to build the program on Windows itself.

Have you tested your branch on Windows, or tested cross-compiling it?
Is this branch publicly available if I wanted to try and do some testing on it?

Re: Qt 6.0 development and qelectrotech

null@example.com (Kellermorph) — Tue, 06 Jan 2026 08:56:19 +0000

Do i understand it correctly that the Problem with Wayland

https://qelectrotech.org/forum/viewtopic.php?id=3058

is gone with QT6?

Re: Qt 6.0 development and qelectrotech

null@example.com (Joshua) — Mon, 05 Jan 2026 13:05:36 +0000

French :
Bonjour, durant mes vacances j'ai testé sur une nouvelle branche basé sur le master (avec des mélanges de commit provenant de la branche qt6 cmake) la bascule avec qt6 et kf6. Tout n'est pas encore fini mais ça avance bien. Par contre je n'ai aucun problème avec les bibliothèques KF6. Pourquoi avoir supprimé kautosavefile ainsi que kwidgetaddon, pour les réimplementé nous même ? Je n'en vois pas l'intérêt, je préfère largement garder du code provenant de KF6 qui est grandement corrigé et testé que de réinventer la roue. Ai je raté quelque-chose ?

Translated english
Résultat de la traduction

Hello, during my vacation I tested switching to qt6 and kf6 on a new branch based on the master (with a mix of commits from the qt6 cmake branch). It's not quite finished yet, but it's coming along nicely. However, I have no problems with the KF6 libraries. Why remove kautosavefile and kwidgetaddon, only to reimplement them ourselves? I don't see the point. I would much rather keep code from KF6, which has been extensively corrected and tested, than reinvent the wheel. Have I missed something?

Re: Qt 6.0 development and qelectrotech

null@example.com (Kellermorph) — Thu, 25 Dec 2025 10:02:28 +0000

You're welcome. Merry Christmas to you too.

Re: Qt 6.0 development and qelectrotech

null@example.com (scorpio810) — Wed, 24 Dec 2025 16:39:50 +0000

Kellermorph wrote:

are u fine with this?

Thanks you Thomas.

Merry Christmas.

Re: Qt 6.0 development and qelectrotech

null@example.com (Kellermorph) — Wed, 24 Dec 2025 13:48:35 +0000

are u fine with this?

Re: Qt 6.0 development and qelectrotech

null@example.com (scorpio810) — Wed, 24 Dec 2025 05:18:00 +0000

Kellermorph wrote:

Who knows what has changed since version 0.9?
Is there a summary somewhere, and does this only need to be described in detail once?

https://qelectrotech.org/forum/viewtopi … 102#p22102

Re: Qt 6.0 development and qelectrotech

null@example.com (Kellermorph) — Tue, 23 Dec 2025 17:37:43 +0000

scorpio810 wrote:

Yes, we can close out the year by tagging version 0.100 since it's been a while, but it bothers me that we're not providing a detailed changelog... like we used to do for older versions.
It's become something of a habit over the last four or five years, you might say, and critics will point out that three years later, nothing has been noted. The fault lies with a lack of time and perhaps rigour on our part... We have experienced very serious health problems affecting Joshua and myself at the same time, which almost put an end to this magnificent community project used daily around the world.

Of course, future versions built with the Qt6 frameworks will have updated QET version numbering in the qet.h file, but I don't yet know how they will be numbered: 0.200 or 0.600, 2026, etc.

Who knows what has changed since version 0.9?
Is there a summary somewhere, and does this only need to be described in detail once?

Re: Qt 6.0 development and qelectrotech

null@example.com (scorpio810) — Tue, 23 Dec 2025 14:54:50 +0000

Yes, we can close out the year by tagging version 0.100 since it's been a while, but it bothers me that we're not providing a detailed changelog... like we used to do for older versions.

It's become something of a habit over the last four or five years, you might say, and critics will point out that three years later, nothing has been noted. The fault lies with a lack of time and perhaps rigour on our part... We have experienced very serious health problems affecting Joshua and myself at the same time, which almost put an end to this magnificent community project used daily around the world.

Of course, future versions built with the Qt6 frameworks will have updated QET version numbering in the qet.h file, but I don't yet know how they will be numbered: 0.200 or 0.600, 2026, etc.