[Development] Can we bring back QT += declarative?

[lars.knoll at nokia.com]

On 7/19/12 1:03 PM, "ext Robin Burchell" <robin+qt at viroteck.net> wrote:

>On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 1:58 PM,  <casper.vandonderen at nokia.com> wrote:
>> What do we want to do in the examples in that case? Can we there still
>>use
>> "QT += qtquick1"?
>
>I'm not sure how that is going to be less confusing. I'd say it's worse.
>
>QDeclarative* classes => old QML
>QT += declarative => old QML
>
>QQuick* classes => new QML
>QT += quick => new QML
>
>The only part that doesn't fit in that suggestion is the git
>repository name, which end-users aren't going to be exposed to. If you
>use "quick1", then you have to explain that, well no, actually, quick1
>is the same as declarative in past Qt releases, but quick is really
>qtquick2, etcŠ

The repo name is something we are using when developing Qt. It has nothing
to do with our external APIs, and if we start exposing internal structure
to our user base, we're doing something wrong :)

Cheers,
Lars