[Development] important: upcoming rename of _qpa.h to _p.h

[marius.storm-olsen at nokia.com]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Girish Ramakrishnan [mailto:girish at forwardbias.in]
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 4:03 AM,  <marius.storm-olsen at nokia.com> wrote:
> > On 17/04/2012 03:34, ext Paul Olav Tvete wrote:
> >> On Tuesday 17 April 2012 03:57:16 ext Girish Ramakrishnan wrote:
> >>> As per the previous discuss, I renamed all the _qpa.h to _p.h with
> >>> a couple of helper scripts
> >>
> >> I just added the following "-1" comment on gerrit:
> >>
> >> I do not agree with this change. We have made a difference between
> >> public API and plugin API, and this is different from private
> >> implementation detail.
> >>
> >> The rest of the Lighthouse team are also skeptical. The main issue,
> >> as far as I can see, is documentation. This can be solved much in a
> >> much simpler way by using the \internal tag, as discussed earlier.
> >> There should also be a warning in the _qpa.h files, but it shouldn't
> >> be the "don't even think of using this file" warning from the _p.h
> >> file; these files are there for platform plugin authors to use.
> >
> > Also remember that yes, we don't promise BC from 5.0.0, but at some
> > point we would want the QPA api to stabilize at let it keep the same
> > promise as the rest of Qt, don't we?
> >
> > At which point, we would have to rename the files again?
> 
> This is how we have always done development in Qt. It starts out with
> _p.h and then becomes .h :)

Well, that breaks SC for existing projects, which have been ok with the missing BC. So you want to improve by promising BC by breaking SC?

-- 
.marius