[Development] QML Tooling Renames (was: Pending decisions on co-installation)

[Knoll Lars]

On Nov 21, 2012, at 8:34 AM, Samuel Rødal <samuel.rodal at digia.com>
 wrote:

> On 11/20/2012 05:05 PM, Alan Alpert wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 8:00 AM, Jana Aurindam <Aurindam.Jana at digia.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> To summarize QML tool naming discussion so far:
>>>>> 
>>>>> In qtquick1 repo
>>>>> qmlviewer -> qml1viewer
>>>>> qmlplugindump  -> qml1plugindump
>>> 
>>>> That's already the name, isn't it?
>>> 
>>>>> In qtdeclarative repo
>>>>> qmlscene -> qml2scene
>>>>> qmlplugindump  -> qml2plugindump
>>>>> qmlbundle -> move to playground
>>>>> qmlmin -> qmlmin
>>>>> qmlprofiler -> qmlprofiler
>>>>> qmltestrunner -> qml2testrunner
>>>>> qmleasing -> qml2easing
>>>>> easingcurveeditor -> qml2easing (merge tools)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Does anyone have any further feedback on QML tool renaming before these
>>>>> get implemented?
>>> 
>>>> I don't feel too strong about the particular names anymore. But if you're changing the names of especially qmlplugindump, qmlviewer, qmlscene, it should go in fast ! We need to fix Qt Creator then, too, and I >guess also a bunch of documentation ...
>>> 
>>> I am quite against the renaming of binaries.
>>> Does qml2scene mean that there is an equivalent qml1scene?
>>> what is the difference between qmlviewer in qt 4.8 and qt 5.0 that a renaming is necessary?
>> 
>> Differences between qmlviewer and qmlscene
>> qmlviewer only:
>> -Renders QtQuick 1 scenes.
>> -Has some built in testing functionality
>> -Has some additional development UI (logger window, screen shots, and such)
>> qmlscene only:
>> -Renders QtQuick 2 scenes.
>> 
>> If the names are left as they are, it's not entirely clear which to
>> use in your development. qml1viewer for qml1 and qml2scene for qml2
>> makes this fairly clear.
> 
> One core difference is that qmlviewer uses QDeclarativeView and qmlscene 
> uses the scene graph. I presume that if we did a QtQuick 3.0 it might 
> still use the scene graph, and thus we'd still use qmlscene to run 
> QtQuick 3.0 applications. Or do we want to end up with qml3scene, 
> qml4scene, etc?

> Or, is the versioning of QML, the language, completely decoupled from 
> the versioning of QtQuick, the set of basic components and enablers for 
> UI development? If so I guess it makes sense that qml2scene could still 
> run QtQuick 3.0 applications if that would still use version 2 of QML. 
> We're not very explicit about the language versioning in code nor in 
> documentation though.

A valid question. qmlscene is linking to both QtQml and QtQuick, so it's bound to the version of both libs. 

I wonder if we gain a lot by doing this numbering. Does it make things clearer to developers, esp. now that the Quick1 lib is called QtDeclarative again, and Quick2 is QtQml and QtQuick?

Cheers,
Lars