[Releasing] QtCreator sources (or just headers) to Qt5 installer?

Koehne Kai Kai.Koehne at digia.com
Tue Oct 23 09:08:55 CEST 2012

> -----Original Message-----
> From: releasing-bounces+kai.koehne=digia.com at qt-project.org
> [mailto:releasing-bounces+kai.koehne=digia.com at qt-project.org] On Behalf
> Of Äijälä Johanna
> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 8:27 AM
> To: releasing at qt-project.org
> Subject: [Releasing] QtCreator sources (or just headers) to Qt5 installer?
> Hi all,
> Question about Creator sources in installer, current Qt5 installer, that has
> QtCreator build with Qt 4.8, has Creator sources as one component. Now
> that we are updating to have Creator built with Qt5, we were wondering, do
> we still keep the sources there? I understood that it's not necessary to have
> all sources, but as a input from Lars we might include certain headers there
> for 3rd party developers.
I think we should stay with providing the (complete) Qt Creator headers, or no headers at all. Qt Creator doesn't really feature "public API" in the Qt sense: There's a convention to put symbols only meant to use inside a plugin in an "Internal" namespace, while the other symbols reside in the plugin namespace, but that's it. No _p.h vs .h files, no BC or even SC promise ... Trying to split up 'public' headers from the rest of the sources would probably be an untested artifact that would people give the wrong impression that there is a 'stable' API in Qt Creator.
Actually I'm pretty sure we didn't ship the Qt Creator sources in the (Nokia) Qt SDK before. Why should we start doing so? What's the use case? I guess there's only a handful of people developing Qt Creator plugins outside of Digia, and they are happy with using git.

Just my 2 cents,


> So, do we include just a specific set of headers? Is something else needed?
> In that case, Tim could you create a .7z for us that includes the headers?
> Br,
> Johanna

More information about the Releasing mailing list