[Interest] Kicking out QtScript completely

[André Pönitz]

On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 04:37:23PM +0100, Alejandro Exojo wrote:
> El Tuesday 17 March 2015, Koehne Kai escribió:
> > The QtQml library has no GUI dependency. So while I see some porting effort
> > to switch from QtScript to QtQml, it's not true that this prevents command
> > line applications.
> > 
> > And you don't have to use the QML language either ... QtQml has a QJSEngine
> > class.
> 
> Or... keep using QtScript. People seem to complain only when a module is 
> deprecated in a blog post, but don't raise their voice when they see no 
> commits at all:

This is understandable insofar as "keeping the status quo" is good enough,
if not "all that's desirable", in a lot of setups.

People who have a bread-and-butter-application that happens to use libraries
X_1 ... X_n as *helpers* for their primary case are typically only interested
in keeping the depenendencies in a workable state in their prefered setup,
i.e. compatible with the toolchain and tooling they choose for their main
application.

Performance improvements and security fixes for those libraries dependencies
are typically welcome, less so source incompatible changes that require
changes to their general setup or, worse, their b&b application itself.

> If it worked for you in previous releases, it should work more or less the 
> same in the next ones, because it received almost no changes.

Right.

And this may continue for a while. But at some time $ANCIENT_VERSION_OF_X_I
does not compile with $PREFERED_COMPILER anymore. Then $PEOPLE have a problem.
Since $PEOPLE know this happens rather sooner than later after $X_I is called
"deprecated" or "done", $PEOPLE will start complaining as soon as $X_I is put
in that basket. That is predictable (and if I may add: sane and rational)
human behaviour.

Andre'