Browser Development • Re: Linux Pale Moon with Qt toolkit

I would assume that this project would be Qt6 [...]

For now it is. Got no problems with that, on the contrary I wish to see it succeed. As long as I could build it myself for a reasonable amount of time in the future - considering the lack of official support for older machines/OS (which I do understand) - I'd gladly use it on a daily basis instead of the Gtk3 version I'm using now. But if a Qt5 variant could be added to the code reasonably easy then it might be of value at least for a certain segment of the userbase that are currently on a KDE system and would prefer Qt5 to Qt6 which might not be mature enough for their liking. And for me as well, as Qt6 is still a very recent addition to this system, and I'm not yet sure what issues may arise in time when mixing two or more Qt variants.There already is an annoying issue of the Qt file picker locking listView headers when switching from Qt5 to Qt6 applications and back, due to different ByteArray format between the two - issue that I had to make a lot of configuration changes in various applications for in order to work around it. This issue seems to have been fixed in Qt 6.3 and higher, but unfortunately right now there is no backport version higher than 6.2.13 available for Ubuntu Bionic and compatible systems, and Mr. Savoury still hasn't replied to my e-mail regarding implementing that particular commit to his backport. So yeah, to me personally (and maybe others that don't have a voice here for any reason) a Qt5 port would be more stable and safer considering, but I'll take whatever I can get.