On 11/1/11 7:31 PM, "ext Thiago Macieira" <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Tuesday, 1 de November de 2011 17:44:29 André Pönitz wrote: >> A non-optional dependency on cmake for Qt 5.0 is not acceptable from my >> perspective. > >Nor mine. > >Quoting André from IRC: a dependency on a buildsystem is acceptable if >and >only if it's the buildsystem that the codebase is built with. > >A few more considerations: > 1) if (or hopefully, when) we switch away from qmake, we should strive >to > maintain qmake compatibility for a while, but not increase our burden >by > having too much burden. > > 2) should all modules in qt5.git use the same buildsystem? I'd say that >all > those enabled by that repository's buildsystem should use the same > buildsystem. However, for purposes of housekeeping and QA, submodule >links > to repositories with other buildsystems is permitted. Note we haven't > discussed rules about adding or removing submodule links to addons >yet. > > 3) should modules hosted in qt-project.org use the same buildsystem? Not > sure, but I'd guess the answer is "no". I'd say "no, but using the default build system is strongly encouraged". Lars > > 4) Qt addons hosted elsewhere use whatever buildsystem their maintainers >want > to use. > >-- >Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com > Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center > Intel Sweden AB - Registration Number: 556189-6027 > Knarrarnäsgatan 15, 164 40 Kista, Stockholm, Sweden >_______________________________________________ >Development mailing list >[email protected] >http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
