[Development] Online installer no longer lets users choose between Qt 5.3.0 and Qt 5.3.1

[Sze Howe Koh]

On 4 July 2014 00:14, Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira at intel.com> wrote:
> On Thursday 03 July 2014 10:35:30 Koehne Kai wrote:
>> Right, the files are still there. But to allow parallel installation (which
>> is probably what you want if you e.g. are after regression testing) we'd
>> need to repackage the old Qt 5.3.0 binaries , giving it a new installation
>> path, changing Qt Creator kit / Qt version id's , names ...
>>
>> It's certainly possible, but I'm not sure whether it's really worth it,
>> given that we still have offline installers.

I can understand the benefits of the new approach. As the new releases
come, the number of options in the installer would keep increasing so
the new approach keeps that in check.

Unfortunately there are downsides too:

1) Developers who face regressions (not just testers) are now in an
awkward position, and need to install an extra copy of Qt Creator (see
below)

2) In Qt Creator, the Qt version and kit are still listed as "Qt
5.3.0", even though it has been upgraded to Qt 5.3.1. Since it is an
auto-detected entry, the user cannot change the name.

> Is it possible to use the offline installer to install 5.3.0 into the existing
> installation and not install a new Qt Creator?

No. When running an installer (online or offline), Qt Creator is a
compulsory component (although Qt itself is non-compulsory). I
remember someone saying that Qt Creator is made compulsory because of
interdependencies between the Maintenance Tool and Qt Creator.

What are these dependencies? I'm willing to have a go at reducing this
coupling, if I know where to look. I believe one of them is for the
installer to register "auto-detected" kits. Instead of having the
installer perform this registration, would it make sense for it to
simply add a "search path" to a global Qt Creator config file, and let
Qt Creator search for and register new copies of Qt at startup?


Regards,
Sze-Howe