Go back to using libtorrent 1.2.x until qBittorrent 5.x

[Pentaphon]

Suggestion

I think the project should go back to using libtorrent 1.2.x until qBittorrent 5.x

Use case

libtorrent 2.x is simply not ready for new versions of qBittorrent 4.x and many people are staying at 4.3.9 (last version with 1.2.x) because of this. I think the project should consider sticking with 1.2.x until qBittorrent 5.x to give libtorrent more time to work out the bugs. 2.x should only be used on test versions of qBittorrent until 5.x comes out.

Considering that libtorrent is still maintaining 1.2.x with releases such as https://github.com/arvidn/libtorrent/releases/tag/v1.2.17

It makes sense to continue with 1.2.x for production versions of qBittorrent 4.x until testers can figure out the issues with libtorrent 2.x

Extra info/examples/attachments

No response

qBt 4.4.x is still providing builds with RC1_2 so this is kinda invalid request.

[Pentaphon]

qBt 4.4.x is still providing builds with RC1_2 so this is kinda invalid request.

Mac and Linux users are pretty much stuck with 2.x and most Windows users have no idea that those builds are being offered, especially since those builds are mostly about testing qt6

[thalieht]

And what's so magical about qBt 5.x that tells you it won't have problems with libt 2.x? It seems to me that you mean
"Provide 1.2.x builds for Mac and Appimage".

[Pentaphon]

And what's so magical about qBt 5.x that tells you it won't have problems with libt 2.x?

Nothing. It's just a milestone that would be good to delay libtorrent 2.x deployment in qBittorrent because it is still a long way out, giving the libtorrent dev more time to figure out what is going on with libtorrent 2.x

It seems to me that you mean
"Provide 1.2.x builds for Mac and Appimage".

Not really. I think the qBittorrent 4.4.x series has been so problematic for users that it is worth considering going back to libtorrent 1.2.x since so many people are choosing to stick with 4.3.9 since that is the last version that doesn't stop responding on their system.

[stalkerok]

A lot of people do not know about the existence of qbt 4.4.x with libtorrent 1.2.x, it's true

[xavier2k6]

A lot of people do not know about the existence of qbt 4.4.x with libtorrent 1.2.x, it's true

I don't see how people don't know that.....it's on the main site!

@Pentaphon You opened a discussion about us whittling down the issues.....now you've just gone & created a needless (IMO) ticket.

What issues have you experienced personally with libtorrent 2.x as so far you've no ticket open with any issue related to it??

If you have experienced issues, have you tried to reproduce them with the latest qBittorrent master CI builds??

[Pentaphon]

I don't see how people don't know that.....it's on the main site!

Because most people just go for the main download. Most people don't even know what qt6 is. You know that's true.

You opened a discussion about us whittling down the issues.....now you've just gone & created a needless (IMO) ticket.

That's a completely separate issue, which people clearly agreed with me on, according to the votes I got. As for this ticket, I'll be glad to close it once its been given some consideration.

What issues have you experienced personally with libtorrent 2.x as so far you've no ticket open with any issue related to it??

I don't need to open tickets about this issue because they are already open. I'm not trying to spam you guys considering we still have 2,300 issues open. This ticket is about suggesting that the project revert to the actively maintained 1.2.x until libtorrent solves their issues with 2.x

Here's just a few of the tickets about the issues people have with libtorrent 2.x

#16043
#17314
#17216
#16709
#16672

If you have experienced issues, have you tried to reproduce them with the latest qBittorrent master CI builds??

No because like many people I've went to 4.3.9. and I need my torrents to work.

[xavier2k6]

Because most people just go for the main download.

• Well the information is there, we can't help it if (most) people as you suggest don't read what's in front of them.

---

Most people don't even know what qt6 is. You know that's true.

• Well the same could be said for our other dependencies Boost/zlib/OpenSSL etc.

---

That's a completely separate issue, which people clearly agreed with me on, according to the votes I got

• 13 Votes isn't really a great indicator from our user base?!

---

considering we still have 2,300 issues open.

• Just like your Poll....the numbers you present are slightly exaggerated!
  

Also, as I've pointed out to you before the current 2,273 TICKETS are broken down/represent 1,113 Issues & 1,160 Feature Requests

---

This ticket is about suggesting that the project revert to the actively maintained 1.2.x until libtorrent solves their issues.

• Again, as I've previously pointed out - this team has brought about fixes to libtorrent 2.x & 1.2.x which are both actively maintained by libtorrent maintainer.

---

Here's just a few of the tickets about the issues people have with libtorrent 2.x

• Testing with CI builds should shine some light on those "issues".....if they still remain.

---

like many people I've went to 4.3.9

• This doesn't seem to be reflective in the connected peers I'm seeing?! (now granted, it doesn't indicate that they are all libtorrent 2.x based builds either)

---

Has anybody tested libtorrent 2.0.7 yet?

• Reference: File checking speed for 4.4.0 is much slower than 4.3.9 #16043 (comment)
  Please give the latest master CI with libtorrent 2.0.7 a try:
  https://github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent/actions/runs/2844466389#artifacts

Or

• Latest master with latest libtorrent RC_2_0 commit:
  https://github.com/xavier2k6/qBittorrent/suites/7792708553/artifacts/328419552

[stalkerok]

This doesn't seem to be reflective in the connected peers I'm seeing?! (now granted, it doesn't indicate that they are all libtorrent 2.x based builds either)

Can make a postscript which libtorrent is used by the client?

[Pentaphon]

Well the information is there, we can't help it if (most) people as you suggest don't read what's in front of them.

Knowing that, you should make a more explicit announcement saying "IF YOU WANT TO GO BACK TO LIBTORRENT 1.2.X PLEASE USE THE RC1.2 BUILDS"

13 Votes isn't really a great indicator from our user base?!

Still the majority in the poll.

Just like your Poll....the numbers you present are slightly exaggerated!

I clearly said issues so I am technically correct.

Testing with CI builds should shine some light on those "issues".....if they still remain.

Going back to 1.2.x in the main downloads and letting only testers willing to use CI builds and other test builds should be enough to get those 2.x issues fixed. Many people are probably wondering why qBittorrent stops responding so much but they don't know about going to Github to file an issue. It would be better for the current userbase to continue using the 1.2.x builds than have to deal with 2.x builds. The issues with 4.4.x are probably leaving a bad taste in their mouths.

...if they still remain.

If they don't remain, where's the 4.4.4 release to show that?

This doesn't seem to be reflective in the connected peers I'm seeing?! (now granted, it doesn't indicate that they are all libtorrent 2.x based builds either)

That's probably public torrenters with almost no torrents in their client just casually downloading one thing at a time and then closing their client. There's still a lot of utorrent users out there who also do the same thing. Many of the people I know who seed hundreds or even thousands of torrents have complained about qBittorrent and I told them to go with 4.3.9 and their issues stopped. Some even moved to other clients in frustration.

Please give the latest master CI with libtorrent 2.0.7 a try:

I can't mess with my hundreds of torrents right now. I'll give it a shot when 4.4.4 comes out but I don't expect things to change until other users confirm.

[glassez]

Going back to 1.2.x in the main downloads and letting only testers willing to use CI builds and other test builds should be enough to get those 2.x issues fixed

Who are these testers you're talking about? We don't have a paid staff. All we have is our community (including the developers themselves). So our testers are ordinary users who like qBittorrent, and who have a desire to help its development, and not just to blame developers.
We are all often limited only by our personal use case (trust me, for me personally qBittorrent doesn't have 99% of all those problems). To cover something more, we need the real participation of those who use it, because for everyone else, some aspect may be unnatural, unusual and even strange to take care of it during development or testing. And while it is enough just to let us know about some of these aspects so that we take them into account in further development, or so that one of the enthusiasts could test them, others cannot be processed without the active participation of interested parties. So the main problems of libtorrent-2.0 remained behind the scenes before we started using it in productive releases, since they did not affect the most active part of the community. And if the rest of the community continues to sit on the sidelines, waiting for someone else to fix/test/confirm, then these problems may remain unresolved.

[Pentaphon]

Who are these testers you're talking about? We don't have a paid staff. All we have is our community (including the developers themselves). So our testers are ordinary users who like qBittorrent, and who have a desire to help its development, and not just to blame developers.

What exactly does the lack of a paid staff have to do with the simple decision to hold libtorrent 2.x back until a later date? You can do this with a single person's decision.

So the main problems of libtorrent-2.0 remained behind the scenes before we started using it in productive releases, since they did not affect the most active part of the community. And if the rest of the community continues to sit on the sidelines, waiting for someone else to fix/test/confirm, then these problems may remain unresolved.

Guess what? The main problems of libtorrent 2.x are now in full display, affecting most of your users by you willingly using it in production releases. The actual main problem right now is that you guys are insisting on keeping libtorrent 2.x in your production releases instead of simply saying "hey 2.x doesn't work well for our users yet, let's go back to 1.2.x until our volunteer testers and the libtorrent devs can figure out whats going on with 2.x"

I really think you should keep 2.x to a smaller part of the community because right now, it's only causing headaches for the main userbase. Do you realize how long it took for 1.x to become stable enough as it is now? Heck, you may have to wait for 2.1.x and then maybe 2.2.x before all the issues are ironed out. Clearly, 2.x needs more time to test and fix before it is unleashed to the public. It's time to reconsider whether this was actually a good idea or not and be willing to roll back libtorrent to 1.2.x if need be.