[Development] QML engine C++ class renaming

marius.storm-olsen at nokia.com marius.storm-olsen at nokia.com
Fri Feb 17 14:38:38 CET 2012

On 17/02/2012 07:27, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On sexta-feira, 17 de fevereiro de 2012 13.20.09,
> marius.storm-olsen at nokia.com wrote:
>> On 17/02/2012 05:39, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
>>> On sexta-feira, 17 de fevereiro de 2012 01.47.13,
>>> andrew.den-exter at nokia.com wrote:
>>>> I'm not saying there won't be any maintenance burden, but it's
>>>> not massively greater than a lot of other modules either.
>>> I'll take your word for it.
>>> What I'm still looking for is that someone comes out and says
>>> "yeah, we'll handle that maintenance for the next year or two".
>> Modules classified as "done" don't have to be rejected from the
>> release. We have several modules classified as "done".
> QtXml, QtScript and QtSvg have very little in terms of private API
> they use. QtDeclarative is quite different.
> I'm still looking for someone who will be responsible for that,
> however minimal it might sound to you.

I never said it sounded minimal.

What I mean is, if the QtDeclarative team wants QtQuick1 to remain in 
the release, they _can_ define it as "done", which is not the same as 
"maintained", or abandoned for that matter.

It means they will not "maintain" it, in the sense of fixing bugs etc, 
but would need to ensure that it keeps compiling for each release, so it 
can be used. If that level of commitment cannot be made, I agree, it 
shouldn't be in the release.


More information about the Development mailing list