[Development] qtchooser (was: Re: Adding new third party component three.js to Qt?)

[Tomasz Siekierda]

On 20 January 2015 at 05:23, Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira at intel.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 January 2015 00:47:50 Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
>> I think there is a point which we might be missing in this long thread. For
>> Qt5 we are not asking for a simple rename because that *would* break stuff
>> for other people, and that's not fair. What we ask is *adding* an
>> executable with a suffixed -qt5, be it as a symlink where the OS allows it
>> or as copy of the executable if there is no other way out.
>
> You're forgetting the documentation. It's not just adding the symlink or new
> binary. We have to tell people that this is what they should use.
>
> If we're going to do this, we should do it for ALL operating systems and all
> builds, plus adapt Qt Creator.

I know this is not high on the priority list, but please also consider
new users of Qt (there are many of them!), who often try to learn
using old books and forum posts, and look into the documentation only
when threatened with fire. And updates to docs and examples often come
months/ years after a change in Qt happens.

Right now an instruction that can be given to any noob is:
"if you want to compile your project, just run
qmake
make/ nmake/ mingw32-make/ jom"

Now that is already confusing to a lot of people ("what? What does
make/ nmake/ jom mean? Which should I choose?"). I imagine changing
this instruction to:
"if you want to compile your project, just run
qmake/ qmake-qt5/ qmake-qt6
make/ nmake/ mingw32-make/ jom"

I think this makes the "just run" expression rather laughable.
Transition from Qt4 to Qt5 was already painful for people learning to
code, for whom even simple things like "add QT+=widgets to .pro file;
don't run this example, it has not been updated yet; sorry, the
deployment process has been changed completely" is a challenge.

BR,
sierdzio