[Interest] QtSVG deprecated

[Andreas Pakulat]

On 11.01.12 15:34:34, Alex Malyushytskyy wrote:
> > No you don't. You have something which tries to implement Svg Tiny, but
> > apparently is not complete or bug-free.
> 
> I believe you are wrong.
> Check discussion above and there was a statement that it is considered
> "Complete"

Thats not how I read Thiago's first reply in this thread:

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Thiago Macieira <thiago at kde.org> wrote:
> On Monday, 9 de January de 2012 14.16.05, Scott Aron Bloom wrote:
>> This came up at DevDays...
>>
>>
>>
>> There needs to be a status of "No maintained because we consider it
>> complete"
>>
>> Meaning, the code is stable, known bugs are fixed, and new
>> enhancements
>> will not be added as "other" classes are better used.
>
> That's the "Done" state.
>
> QtSvg was in the "Deprecated" camp for two reasons:
>  1) there's a more complete implementation of SVG inside WebKit
>  2) QtSvg says it implements SVG Tiny 1.2
>
> The second item is important: we can't consider done if we haven't
> achieved
> full compliancy. Not to mention that any bugs related to being
> compliant would
> need to be fixed.
>
> That's why it ended up in Deprecated: we actually want people to stop
> using
> the module.

To me that clearly says QtSvg does not implement SVG Tiny 1.2 fully and
not just that its implementation is different from other
implementations.

> My over 20 years experience shows that there is no bug free software,
> there are bugs that either have not being found yet or just ignored.

Well, one example of a bug-free application would be

int main()
{
return 0;
}

Sure it does not do anything useful, but its pretty much bug-free. I
agree though that real-world applications always have bugs :)

> 
> Regards,
>      Alex
> _______________________________________________
> Interest mailing list
> Interest at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
>