[Development] moc output from non-local tool build
Thiago Macieira
thiago.macieira at intel.com
Wed Sep 15 02:25:24 CEST 2021
On Tuesday, 14 September 2021 12:08:20 PDT Joerg Bornemann wrote:
> I've experimented with this and came up with
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtbase/+/370958
> which allows to build qtbase dev (6.3.0) against a host Qt 6.1.2.
>
> Note that we don't have any version restriction if we go that route.
Not unless we make one, by policy. I think we should.
I propose we limit compatibility to ±3 minor releases. For example, that means
Qt 6.3 should build with the tools from Qt 6.0 through 6.6. Effectively:
A) library code that consumes tool output must be compatible with the output
generated from the previous 3 versions
B) tools must retain the ability to produce content limited that is accepted
by any of the previous 3 versions
C) all tools should get a command-line flag to specify the requested output
version ASAP
Since these options don't exist yet:
D) the buildsystems (both CMake and qmake) should be updated to pass starting
the command-line option with Qt 6.5 (if we get them in 6.2.0) or 6.6 (if not)
E) until then, the tool output and the header consumption must remain
compatible forwards and backwards. Only in the N+1 release (6.6 or 6.7) will
we be allowed to change the default output.
That means change https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtbase/+/370750/1
needs to retain compatibility without a flag (easy for me).
Questions:
a) should we reduce to ±2 minor releases? ±3 is the 2-year sliding window and
ensures there are two LTS in the range (not counting the release itself, if it
is an LTS), whereas ±2 means there's only one and an LTS is not required to be
compatible with any other.
b) can we get the version flags right now, in 6.2.0? The tools don't need to
do anything with the flag, only accept it.
c) alternatively, should we use an environment variable? That way, the
buildsystems don't have to wait for 6.5/6.6 to start setting them, which means
we can change the defaults at those versions, instead of N+1.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel DPG Cloud Engineering
More information about the Development
mailing list