[Development] qmlbundle vs Qt Resource System

Koehne Kai Kai.Koehne at digia.com
Tue Aug 13 08:45:44 CEST 2013

> -----Original Message-----
> From: development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia.com at qt-project.org
> [mailto:development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia.com at qt-project.org] On
> Behalf Of Thiago Macieira
> Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 1:07 AM
> To: development at qt-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Development] qmlbundle vs Qt Resource System
> On terça-feira, 13 de agosto de 2013 00:04:43, André Pönitz wrote:
> > 1. Having a couple of .qml, .png and whatever non-executable, but
> > potentially target (resolution...) dependent resources loaded and
> > "run" in some kind of viewer application.
> >
> > -> Smells like the resource system might be suited (rcc -binary,
> >    recognize/load result into viewer application)
> Since rcc does not do that (yet), you're effectively describing qmlbundle.

Well, 'rcc -binary' generating architecture-independent .rcc files exists. What's missing is the tight integration of such .rcc files into qtdeclarative (e.g. that a qmldir file can in fact be a rcc file). 
> What I think we should investigate is how to minimise the migration cost of a
> completely architecture-independent deployment to a "oh, I need a little bit
> of native code" type of applications.

Not sure what you mean: Both rcc and qmlbundle generate AFAIK architecture-independent files. The only difference in this regard is that qrc files can also be embedded into a binary, while qmlbundle files cannot be (yet).



More information about the Development mailing list