[Development] Request a new branch for Qt Creator

Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.) bstottle at ford.com
Tue Aug 6 01:48:54 CEST 2019

Before I address André's specific questions, let me add a little more context.

We have a few plugins for QtC that were developed with KDAB starting about 5 years ago with the development of Qt Remote Objects.  We've actually had several developers from The Qt Company reviewing the code outside of Gerrit, which has been difficult.  Moving to Qt's Gerrit was proposed by them (Simon Hausmann specifically).  We believe the code fills a hole in Qt, one that would require significant development effort to replicate independently.

On 8/5/19, 1:39 PM, "André Pönitz" <apoenitz at t-online.de> wrote:     
    Would it be possible to use a less overloaded name? After a bit of search
    I think I get now what it refers to, but it surely was not my first guess.

I'm open to changing the name of the plugin.  I'd rather discuss that as part of the review process though.  If we need a better name for the branch, is "acme-simulator" acceptable?
    How is this planned to be maintained? Will you do that, and the mainline is
    not affected at all?

Because QtCreator does not maintain binary compatibility like the rest of Qt, maintenance is a burden, requiring changes for each new QtC version.  We'd like that to be taken over by The Qt Company, just as it is done for other plugins.  We expect it to be much less of a burden for the people making the changes and knowing why they were made.
    For how long? "Eternity"? Or is this a meant to be a feature branch that gets
    incorporated into the mainline at some time?

The hope/plan is to update the code from QtC 4.8 to master in the branch, and let more developers review.  Once approved, we'd like it to be part of QtC and not be maintained in a separate branch.

More information about the Development mailing list