On quinta-feira, 18 de outubro de 2012 18.23.38, Olivier Goffart wrote: > I agree with Ossi on this matter. > > I will add that i don't like to rename qmake to qmake5 because: > > One runs firefox, not firefox15.
Firefox is an end-user application. You upgrade it and you don't keep the older version around. That's like Creator, Designer, Linguist and Assistant. Those aren't getting renamed. > Then you will say firefox is different because you don't want different > version of firefox? But what about web designer who want to test their > website? You may say it is less common. I say most user don't need qmake > which is in a dev package on many distributions. Only developpers need, and > they probably only need one of them. > > Same for g++, they did not rename when binary compatibility was broken. > > Take the most recent example of python. They did not rename the executable. > Some distribution renamed the new one to python3, some other (archlinux) > renamed the old one python2. > > Let the distributions solve the distributor's problem. Let me be very clear: the distributions aren't fixing the distribution's problem. They'd be fixing *ours*. Like I said in another email: qmake will be renamed. That's what people will have when they come into #qt, interest@ or other forums. That means we help- givers need to know how the distributions have renamed and how they've done it. I'd much rather that they didn't apply patches and that everyone had the same solution. So stop being reactive and let's just fix this problem once and for all. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
