[Qt-creator] Target refactoring

[Miller Henry]

-----Original Message-----
From: tobias.hunger at nokia.com [mailto:tobias.hunger at nokia.com] 

>> In this configuration the only difference between all of my devices is the screen resolution which I currently provide via the deploy configuration.
>Now that we have a abstract "device" in project explorer (Christian Kandeler did generalize the code he wrote for remote linux for this, it is already in master), I was wondering whether it would make sense to add the screen resolution to that structure. All the Build/Deploy/RunConfigurations could then get the information from there.

I hope this is more abstract.  Today my project supports two models that differ only on screen size. Tommorow?  I can think of millions of differences that I may need to capture in my configuration (no touch screen, more CAN interfaces...).

>Note that this is just an idea at this stage and will not be part of my patch. It is already way too big for my taste;-)

I don't blame you.

>You can still have several build/deploy/run configurations associated with a target, just like you can now. I don't want to change that. I am mostly moving a lot of information that is scattered over the different configurations at this time into the profile (which in turn is the biggest part of the target you add to your project).

That alone can help.

>> It would be nice to make deploy configurations part of the SDK in some way as well.
>In which way?

Something (probably a set of scripts that I'd write) where qt-creator sees the scripts in my build tree somehow and knows to ask for the ip address of my device and my password, and feeds that to the script.  (this cannot be handled generically easy because you don't know if the device uses ssh or a serial port, if I can tell you what questions to ask you can feed that into my script to upload and install code before starting it.)  Right now everyone writes their own deploy scripts and it is hard to pair with different people when the environment isn't what we expect.

I wouldn't expect this is part of what you are doing, maybe I should open a feature request someplace.

On thinking further, the rest of my post is probably not achievable in a useful way.