LXQT is a viable desktop to low resource systems including small arm boards. Reproducible: Always
I agree, it makes sense to have lxqt there.
Is that a request on principle or do you personally run such systems?
I do run an arm cubieboard with LXQT. I understand if there is no other users, and it is a maintenance burden, I can keyword locally.
For LXQt alone, it probably wouldn't be that much, especially if masking flags that pull in KWin for example, but there are packages that depend on 'kde-frameworks/kwindowsystem', hard, so some of them would be required unless using a different panel for example... though maybe 'kwindowsystem' alone doesn't pull in much at all. Suppose could have only some of the packages keyworded, but no idea how many users there really are, and I'm not one of them doing arch testing at this time, so can't speak for them. :]
KF6 Tier1 packages are easy, since they don't depend on other KF6 pkgs: > kde-frameworks/kwindowsystem:6 # by multiple > kde-frameworks/kidletime:6 # lxqt-base/lxqt-powermanagement > kde-frameworks/solid:6 # lxqt-base/lxqt-powermanagement However, there are these > kde-plasma/layer-shell-qt:6 # by multiple > kde-plasma/libkscreen:6 # by lxqt-base/lxqt-config[monitor] ... as well, but they do not have that many dependencies (at least not yet). Right now they will require > kde-frameworks/breeze-icons:6 > kde-frameworks/kconfig:6 if we don't want ~arm people to end up with old oxygen-icons, at least. Of course we will end up with KEYWORDS patchwork in KF/Plasma, again.
(In reply to Andreas Sturmlechner from comment #5) > Of course we will end up with KEYWORDS patchwork in KF/Plasma, again. I think we should just accept that and make it work.
One other thing is, now we have dola again (a replacement for jiji), I'm already doing regular builds of any major stuff that's keyworded. Hence I think it's fine if we bring back at least lxqt given I'll notice quickly if it's broken.
