[Development] ICU and Windows

[Thiago Macieira]

On segunda-feira, 14 de janeiro de 2013 13.02.46, Shaw Andy wrote:
> Therefore I would like to propose that for 5.0.1 we simply modify the pro
> file so that it expects a d after the library name for the debug version
> and the release one stays as it is.  What we could do to make it more
> robust is connect it into configure so it checks if it exists and if it
> does not fall back onto the release version (and give a warning) so it will
> continue to build as before.
> 
> Then in 5.1.0 we put ICU into the 3rdparty directory and then we have more
> control over it and build it ourselves as it seems that this would give us
> more benefits long term from what John Layt said in a previous mail.
> 
> How does this sound, is there anything that would mean that this is not a
> good thing to do?

I think it's too late for 5.0.1. We could do it for 5.0.2, but I'll insist 
that we don't change anything for 5.0.x, unless it is proven that we are doing 
things wrong.

Let's do the import into 3rdparty for 5.1.0 then, if that's the solution we 
agree upon. And Pau is right: if we need to access the C++ API to get enough 
information for some of our APIs, we'll need to build ourselves for MinGW 
anyway.

-- 
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/20130114/199617b7/attachment.sig>