[Qt-jambi-interest] QtJambi maven stuff - some questions

[Dusan Zatkovsky]

On Monday 18 of January 2010 08:55:36 you wrote:

> Hmm, in my opinion is that the binaries that "belongs" to the Qt system
> should reside there. However, when building binary releases for the
> "public" then you are free to bundle all you want, as we do for assistant,
> designer, etc.
>
> I guess what you should do is to make a new binary release for one of the
> platforms. Based on the work from Bruno, I have made a script that packages
> the necessary components from Qt/QtJambi src compile to a binary release,
> you may have a look on this and modify it with the necessary changes.

Hmm, maybe you misunderstood thinks ( or maybe not ).

My qtjambi maven stuff consists from 2 things:

1.	mavenized libraries

	It is qtjambi-VERSION.jar and qtjambi-PLATFORM-VERSION.jar what we are
	working on now.
	This should ( and will ) be created together with qtjambi build.


But my email was about:

2.	qtjambi maven plugin

	Which is maven plugin used to build ( not run ) maven qtjambi applications.
	It requires qt and qtjambi tools such as juic, lupdate, lrelease and some qt
	libs ( core, xml ) to work, one set for each supported platform.
	
	Yes, that tools should be mavenized together with qtjambi build, but
	this time, when no rock-stable and universal build scripts exists,
	it is impossible to release it and it is much easier to copy that 5
	files manually into source tree. This is the reason why I added all required
	platform binaries manually into repo ( but one maven artifact for each
	platform )

So i have 3 feasible solutions:

1.	I should continue tracking my sources in private repo until qtjambi 4.6
	will not be stable and release only "binaries" ( maven artifacts ) somewhere.

2.	The same as 1, but I should create separate project on sf.net for this.

3.	I'll wait until 4.6 will be released ( and build scripts will be created
	and stable ) and blahblahblah, but this still need a much of work.


I don't know what is the best, maybe it should be no.2, because sources will 
be public ( instead of 1 ), it will be released shortly ( instead of 3 ) and 
anyone should contribute.

-- 
Dusan