[Development] Cleanups for qt5.git

[marius.storm-olsen at nokia.com]

On 06/08/2012 03:47, ext lars.knoll at nokia.com wrote:
...
> The first one is the fact that we have a few modules in there that
> are basically unmaintained for a year and not really functional
> anywhere. The document gallery is such an example and is the first
> one I would like to remove (see
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,32215).

+2

...
> The other problem is a more general issue that is has become
> difficult to get qt5.git moved forward and updated to newer tags. I
> wonder whether it wouldn't be easier to have a list of modules that
> contains less add-ons (ie. focuses more on the essentials plus some
> selected additions), but then maybe adds in qt-creator. IMO this
> could in the longer term be more useful for SDK creation and
> releasing. Add-on modules that are not part of this new qt5.git,
> could then always get tested against the latest qt5.git instead of
> the latest master branches of all modules.

IMO qt5.git should only contain the Qt Essentials. If you have "selected 
additions" there should really be a discussions on why these are 
"selected additions" and not essentials.

For the purpose of SDK creation, we can always have another level of 
"super project" which includes qt5.git, and any "selected" additions you 
would want in the SDK.

At some point I think we would want most addons built in binary form 
when they are ready, as per maintainers opinion. Then the online 
installers can give people the choice to select any addon they wish to 
install, and an indication of which version of the addon they will be 
installing. This of course means that there will be too many 
permutations to actually test, but I think that's fine for general addons.

What's important to test before each release is the strict set of Qt 
Essentials + Qt "selected modules" (and keeping the latter set really 
restricted in size).

I do agree that the add-on modules should be tested against the last 
successful tested version of Qt Essential. That way we can cache this 
binary version until a new successful one replaces it, and we save 
valuable time and resources.

-- 
.marius