This change has broken builds on macOS.
Please see https://binary-factory.kde.org/view/MacOS/job/Kig_Nightly_macos/407/console

Whilst not documented in the Qt Documentation, the qmacfunctions.h header (which is what is included by #include <QtMac>) has the following:

#ifdef Q_OS_OSX
#if QT_DEPRECATED_SINCE(5, 12)
QT_DEPRECATED_X("Use NSApp.dockTile.badgeLabel") Q_MACEXTRAS_EXPORT void setBadgeLabelText(const QString &text);
QT_DEPRECATED_X("Use NSApp.dockTile.badgeLabel") Q_MACEXTRAS_EXPORT QString badgeLabelText();

QT_DEPRECATED_X("Use QPixmap::toImage, QImage::toCGImage, and -[NSImage initWithCGImage:size:]")
Q_MACEXTRAS_EXPORT NSImage *toNSImage(const QPixmap &pixmap);
#endif

Thoughts on the best way forward for macOS builds?

This change due to being in a Framework has KOed all Binary Factory builds for macOS.

In D19455#457367, @bcooksley wrote:

This change has broken builds on macOS.
Please see https://binary-factory.kde.org/view/MacOS/job/Kig_Nightly_macos/407/console

Whilst not documented in the Qt Documentation, the qmacfunctions.h header (which is what is included by #include <QtMac>) has the following:

#ifdef Q_OS_OSX
 #if QT_DEPRECATED_SINCE(5, 12)
 QT_DEPRECATED_X("Use NSApp.dockTile.badgeLabel") Q_MACEXTRAS_EXPORT void setBadgeLabelText(const QString &text);
 QT_DEPRECATED_X("Use NSApp.dockTile.badgeLabel") Q_MACEXTRAS_EXPORT QString badgeLabelText();
 
 QT_DEPRECATED_X("Use QPixmap::toImage, QImage::toCGImage, and -[NSImage initWithCGImage:size:]")
 Q_MACEXTRAS_EXPORT NSImage *toNSImage(const QPixmap &pixmap);
 #endif

Thoughts on the best way forward for macOS builds?

i guess add an
#undef QT_DISABLE_DEPRECATED_BEFORE
inside the
#ifdef Q_OS_MACOS
of src/kstatusnotifieritem.cpp would get us going?

+1 with albert idea.
Or in CMakeLists.txt
if (NOT APPLE)

add_definitions(-DQT_DISABLE_DEPRECATED_BEFORE=0x050d00)

endif()

As I can't compile against MacOsX we can exclude it. It will fix when we will switch to qt6 by os dev.

I'm fine with either fix, any objection to that being committed directly?

"I'm fine with either fix, any objection to that being committed directly?"
no problem for me

In D19455#457849, @bcooksley wrote:

I'm fine with either fix, any objection to that being committed directly?

Sorry if you were waiting for me, sure just go ahead

OK, it looks like everyone is waiting on everyone else in this discussion.

Done now: https://commits.kde.org/knotifications/adc20218571941d19281ad81520aec62e195b355