Am Mittwoch, den 02.11.2011, 12:13 +0000 schrieb [email protected]: > 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. > > > > I'd say "no, but using the default build system is strongly encouraged".
I constantly see strong opinions against qmake, but actually that thing is not that bad as a build system[1]. It permits compact build scripts. It is declarative (very important IMHO). It is extensible. Its worst problem is lack of documentation and therefore a big bunch of inconsistent .prf files and a big bunch of lost gems in /usr/share/qt4/mkspecs Other than that it almost works as advertised. So how about updating the documentation and cleaning up the mkspecs folder instead? Surely not the most fancy job, but maybe much more reasonable than doing things from scratch or even mixing stuff. Ciao, Mathias [1] Says someone with strong roots in autotools, but fully accepting it doesn't fit into Qt's scope. -- Mathias Hasselmann <[email protected]> http://openismus.com/ _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
