[QBS] state and future of qbs

[Arvid E. Picciani]

On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 07:35:52 -0500, Jake Thomas Petroules wrote:

> The two "input" trees produce your two binaries, the
> third tree uses lipo to create a universal binary and package it into
> a dmg for the final product.


that matches pretty much the original idea how qbs build trees are 
constructed. They're not fixed length pipelines.

What you want is called deployment. It's just missing.
Good idea to remind Joerg that some deployment configurations need to 
bundle multiple build variants though ;)


> Yet another possibility could be the ability to apply profiles to
> individual Products rather than the Project as a whole. How would 
> this
> potentially affect dependencies other than Qt?


you can (down to file granularity in fact). If you use that to 
compensate the lack of deployment, the resulting qbs file will be 
terribly unreadable.



> Jörg - you mentioned "proper deployment support" as a goal for 0.3.
> By this are you referring to the equivalent of `make install`, or
> msi/dmg/deb/rpm/etc. packages?



right now qbs definition of "we can build stuff" excludes the results 
to be usable in real life.
It just happens so that they are for some simple configurations.

I don't know if rpms/dpkgs are in scope, but universal binaries 
certainly are.
hopefully android apks as well, and these kinda things.

"Deployment is the stuff that happens after linking", how does that 
sound?



-- 
Arvid E. Picciani