[Development] Qt 6 co-installability with Qt 5

[Jyrki Yli-Nokari]

Thiago is right. Qt’s biggest problem is the barrier of entry. User facing tools must work as documented.

> Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira at intel.com> kirjoitti 16.2.2021 kello 1.15:
> 
> On Monday, 15 February 2021 01:18:16 PST Joerg Bornemann wrote:
>>> To be clear:
>>> 1) the binaries from Qt company must also perform this step
>> 
>> Why? The installer doesn't place binaries into some shared system directory.
> 
> Ok, so long as #2 is done.
> 
>>> 2) the documentation has to be updated to include the "6" at the end too
>> 
>> I disagree.
> 
> This is required. We must teach people to use a set of command-lines that 
> works everywhere. Therefore, the documentation and tutorials about user-public 
> tools should advise them on the commands that work everywhere.
> 
>> Qt's target audience can be split in two groups.
>> 
>> 1. Experienced developers. And I don't even mean Qt-related experience.
>> They're able to figure out to press TAB twice in the shell after typing
>> just "designer<CR>" didn't have the desired effect.
>> It's likely, they've been exposed to python before, you know.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
>> 2. Inexperienced developers. They open their desktop search tool of
>> choice and type in "designer", get (perhaps several) hit(s) and choose
>> the right one. They don't even see the oh-so-confusing binary name.
> 
> Fair enough too, though that one is actually more difficult. Just look at what 
> happens when I search for "Proxy" in the attached image. Granted, if I search 
> for "designer" I get an option saying "Qt 5 Designer" so at least our 
> solutions are in the right direction: use the major version number in our 
> descriptions.
> 
>> Maybe you could elaborate why you deem this so important or point to
>> some place in the documentation where we can see the danger of user
>> confusion. Until then, my position is that we're arguing about a non-issue.
> 
> See above.
> 
> I don't care about the tools that aren't meant to be user-visible, because 
> most users won't care about them. Those who do will know how to find them 
> anyway.
> 
> I'm only worried about qmake6, qml6, qtdiag6 and the others that are meant to 
> be user-facing. I can even excuse qml6 and some of the other tools, but I 
> insist on qmake6 and qtdiag6. Documentation must mention the "6".
> 
> If you want to document "try qmake6 and if that doesn't work try qmake", I'm 
> fine. I think that's a mistake, but I'm fine with it.
> 
> -- 
> Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
>  Software Architect - Intel DPG Cloud Engineering
> <Screenshot_20210215_094757.png>
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development