[GH-ISSUE #3888] [Feature Request]: Get rid of the legacy Qt builds download on the website #1166

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-02-27 21:10:18 +03:00 by kerem · 3 comments

kerem commented

2026-02-27 21:10:18 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @Missake212 on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/shadps4-emu/shadPS4/issues/3888

Checklist

I have searched for a similar issue in this repository and did not find one.

Description

On the website there's still an option to download the Qt builds of shadPS4, since shadPS4 has shifted from Qt builds to a separate Qt Launcher this seems a bit pointless unless you want to get older builds, I think getting rid of this completely, or at least moving it at the bottom of the page (because those builds are outdated, and going forward they'll only keep getting more and more outdated) is probably a better idea.

Reason

While it's nice to have access to older builds, I don't think it makes sense to have them right here on the website and I think it would be wiser to separate them by either getting rid of them completely (you can still get them through GitHub so it's not like you're erasing them) or putting them at the very bottom of the page.

If shadPS4 decides to not get rid of them, I think at the very least making a clear separation between CLI and Legacy Qt is important, right now with the drop down option it says that the last released builds were released on the 24th of December, but that's only true for the CLI builds, not the legacy Qt ones.

In my opinion there's no point having a download link available for those on the website, but if that's not agreed upon I think making a separation between Qt legacy and CLI is necessary.

Examples

No response

Originally created by @Missake212 on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/shadps4-emu/shadPS4/issues/3888 ### Checklist - [x] I have searched for a similar issue in this repository and did not find one. ### Description On the website there's still an option to download the Qt builds of shadPS4, since shadPS4 has shifted from Qt builds to a separate Qt Launcher this seems a bit pointless unless you want to get older builds, I think getting rid of this completely, or at least moving it at the bottom of the page (because those builds are outdated, and going forward they'll only keep getting more and more outdated) is probably a better idea. <img width="2469" height="1142" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/3b66cb69-ac7b-4afb-9182-6f1268530e83" /> ### Reason While it's nice to have access to older builds, I don't think it makes sense to have them right here on the website and I think it would be wiser to separate them by either getting rid of them completely (you can still get them through GitHub so it's not like you're erasing them) or putting them at the very bottom of the page. If shadPS4 decides to not get rid of them, I think at the very least making a clear separation between CLI and Legacy Qt is important, right now with the drop down option it says that the last released builds were released on the 24th of December, but that's only true for the CLI builds, not the legacy Qt ones. <img width="2470" height="1142" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/bfee7786-7203-479f-8183-8d7a04b7f839" /> In my opinion there's no point having a download link available for those on the website, but if that's not agreed upon I think making a separation between Qt legacy and CLI is necessary. ### Examples _No response_

kerem closed this issue

2026-02-27 21:10:18 +03:00

kerem commented

2026-02-27 21:10:19 +03:00

Author

Owner

@GHU7924 commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026):

I agree that old QT builds are unnecessary because up-to-date builds are essential for emulator development. I think we should also remove old builds from GitHub, leaving only their code.

I personally believe we should only allow access to builds from the last six months (i.e., at this point, we can only consider builds starting with 0.11.0 as up-to-date). This solution will save us from having to answer questions about old builds—for example, I downloaded build 0.6.0, it works, but build 0.9.0 doesn't. It will also allow us to completely transition to the new QtLauncher interface, so that new users won't be confused about what they need to download or how to upgrade from old builds to new ones (although measures have been taken to address this issue).

@GHU7924 commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026): I agree that old QT builds are unnecessary because up-to-date builds are essential for emulator development. I think we should also remove old builds from GitHub, leaving only their code. I personally believe we should only allow access to builds from the last six months (i.e., at this point, we can only consider builds starting with 0.11.0 as up-to-date). This solution will save us from having to answer questions about old builds—for example, I downloaded build 0.6.0, it works, but build 0.9.0 doesn't. It will also allow us to completely transition to the new QtLauncher interface, so that new users won't be confused about what they need to download or how to upgrade from old builds to new ones (although measures have been taken to address this issue).

kerem commented

2026-02-27 21:10:19 +03:00

Author

Owner

@thethunderturner commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026):

You're making a good point. The QT versions shouldnt be shown. I believe Ive already made it clear about the separation of QT and CLI. What I can do is hide the QT cards of each version above and including 0.12.5, leaving only the CLI cards. As for removing old builds, Im not completely sure yet; so I will think about it for a bit.

@thethunderturner commented on GitHub (Jan 2, 2026): You're making a good point. The QT versions shouldnt be shown. I believe Ive already made it clear about the separation of QT and CLI. What I can do is hide the QT cards of each version above and including 0.12.5, leaving only the CLI cards. As for removing old builds, Im not completely sure yet; so I will think about it for a bit.

kerem commented

2026-02-27 21:10:19 +03:00

Author

Owner

@thethunderturner commented on GitHub (Jan 10, 2026):

This has been fixed. Can we close this? @StevenMiller123

@thethunderturner commented on GitHub (Jan 10, 2026): This has been fixed. Can we close this? @StevenMiller123

kerem referenced this issue

2026-02-27 21:14:38 +03:00

[PR #1166] [MERGED] Fix Linux QT AppImage #1964