On Nov 21, 2012, at 8:34 AM, Samuel Rødal <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 11/20/2012 05:05 PM, Alan Alpert wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 8:00 AM, Jana Aurindam <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>>>> To summarize QML tool naming discussion so far: >>>>> >>>>> In qtquick1 repo >>>>> qmlviewer -> qml1viewer >>>>> qmlplugindump -> qml1plugindump >>> >>>> That's already the name, isn't it? >>> >>>>> In qtdeclarative repo >>>>> qmlscene -> qml2scene >>>>> qmlplugindump -> qml2plugindump >>>>> qmlbundle -> move to playground >>>>> qmlmin -> qmlmin >>>>> qmlprofiler -> qmlprofiler >>>>> qmltestrunner -> qml2testrunner >>>>> qmleasing -> qml2easing >>>>> easingcurveeditor -> qml2easing (merge tools) >>>>> >>>>> Does anyone have any further feedback on QML tool renaming before these >>>>> get implemented? >>> >>>> I don't feel too strong about the particular names anymore. But if you're >>>> changing the names of especially qmlplugindump, qmlviewer, qmlscene, it >>>> should go in fast ! We need to fix Qt Creator then, too, and I >guess also >>>> a bunch of documentation ... >>> >>> I am quite against the renaming of binaries. >>> Does qml2scene mean that there is an equivalent qml1scene? >>> what is the difference between qmlviewer in qt 4.8 and qt 5.0 that a >>> renaming is necessary? >> >> Differences between qmlviewer and qmlscene >> qmlviewer only: >> -Renders QtQuick 1 scenes. >> -Has some built in testing functionality >> -Has some additional development UI (logger window, screen shots, and such) >> qmlscene only: >> -Renders QtQuick 2 scenes. >> >> If the names are left as they are, it's not entirely clear which to >> use in your development. qml1viewer for qml1 and qml2scene for qml2 >> makes this fairly clear. > > One core difference is that qmlviewer uses QDeclarativeView and qmlscene > uses the scene graph. I presume that if we did a QtQuick 3.0 it might > still use the scene graph, and thus we'd still use qmlscene to run > QtQuick 3.0 applications. Or do we want to end up with qml3scene, > qml4scene, etc? > Or, is the versioning of QML, the language, completely decoupled from > the versioning of QtQuick, the set of basic components and enablers for > UI development? If so I guess it makes sense that qml2scene could still > run QtQuick 3.0 applications if that would still use version 2 of QML. > We're not very explicit about the language versioning in code nor in > documentation though. A valid question. qmlscene is linking to both QtQml and QtQuick, so it's bound to the version of both libs. I wonder if we gain a lot by doing this numbering. Does it make things clearer to developers, esp. now that the Quick1 lib is called QtDeclarative again, and Quick2 is QtQml and QtQuick? Cheers, Lars _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
