[Development] New proposal for the tool naming

[Thiago Macieira]

On domingo, 21 de outubro de 2012 19.06.32, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> I see.
> 
> If such a wrapper exists, then:
> 
>  * It will need to be in a separate package from the Qt 4 and Qt 5 repos
>  * It needs to be maintained and released on its own cycle as needed
>  ** Supported features of conf files will no doubt need to be expanded
>  * It needs to be compatibile with all Qt 4 and all future Qt versions
> forever * Distros will need to make both Qt 4 and Qt 5 packages depend on
> it ** Therefore it can't be implemented in Qt
>  * It will never become obsolete
> 
> All correct? Did I miss anything?

More or less. I was thinking it might work if it's inside the qtbase sources. 
If distros are going to provide Qt 5, they need to compile qtbase anyway. The 
only thing we need is to provide a way for the wrapper from qt5 to be 
suppressed if the qt6 one is being installed.

Providing it outside of Qt 4 or 5 means I need to write it in shell or Perl.

> > This new proposal requires adaptations to the Qt 4 packages, indeed.
> 
> Could you update the proposal to be more clear on that then? Preferably on a
> wiki.

Later, when I know what those requirements are. I'm waiting for packagers and 
others to comment on the proposal.

> Preferably also list goals and non goals. For example Sune's concern that I
> linked to before seems to have become a non-goal. Please make those things
> explicit.

What concern?

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20121021/aecd5d71/attachment.sig>