On Nov 26, 2013, at 10:52 AM, Adam Strzelecki <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Yeah. Unfortunately it's not that easy to fix, since the Qt versions /
>> toolchains packages register themselves into Qt Creator.
>
> Does it have to be so complicated? Why QtCreator just not figures out
> installed Qt versions upon next run if they are installed on well known
> location, otherwise just asks user.
>
> Also Qt installer does really many unnecessary (obsolete) things considering
> supported OSX versions:
> https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-31814
>
>>> Also now way to not install documentation and examples:
>>> https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-34870
>>
>> I personally don't see the point in such fine grain splits. It's a nightmare
>> to test, and there are few people who care (otherwise
>> https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-33121 would have been spotted
>> by more people, I guess).
>
> Right now the choice is really limited to:
> (1) Installing QtCreator only
> (2) Installing QtCreator+Qt frameworks
> (3) Installing all above+Sources
>
> The question is why then we need installer at all, if it has so minimal added
> value? Look at Xcode, everything embedded into Xcode.app. On Mac it is really
> ugly way to ship anything with own custom installer. Even Microsoft & Nvidia
> use native packages.
>
> I have really Mac-centric point of view, but unfortunately Qt5 packaging is
> really Windows-centric, and that’s not the way Mac users like it. On Mac Qt4
> was really close to what Xcode packaging was, not anymore for Qt5.
>
> It is isn’t also Linux friendly, coz if it was it would be shipped as pair of
> RPM/DEB custom repos installing into /opt, not .run like custom installers.
> Again NVIDIA does it well. Also sooner or later someone has to create these
> packages to bundle with specific distro.
>
> Finally if Qt installer framework has online installer capability, why not
> embed it into QtCreator itself and let user download Qt SDK components from
> the app. Need complete offline version? Ship both bare QtCreator and one with
> all components preinstalled.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Adam
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
I agree with everything you say and as an OS X user I feel your pain. Qt SDK
absolutely should be a drag and drop installer just like Xcode. Unfortunately
there are some major blockers in the way before we could begin to think about
doing that - see https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-14150 (and
https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-31814 as you said).
I would argue there is value in an installer since there are multiple versions
of the SDK available. But then again... an online installer is an easy way
around this - put package management into Qt Creator preferences and store SDKs
in /Applications/Qt Creator.app/Contents/SDKs/{mkspec}-{version}.qtsdk/ But
what exactly do you include in the offline installer? OS X, iOS and two or
three Android versions (and eventually BlackBerry?)? That would be massive. One
solution is that SDKs bundles in a DMG could be provided as separate downloads
(and the builtin package manager in QtC could automate downloading and
installing them). The .qtsdk extension could be registered with Creator -
double clicking it registers it with the Qt Creator version it's opened with,
and QtC pops up a dialog even offering to move the SDK folder within its app
bundle.
To use the .qtsdk by itself (without QtC) just drop the folder somewhere and go.
These are nice eventual goals but it will take a lot of work in different areas
to get there.
--
Jake Petroules
Chief Technology Officer
Petroules Corporation · www.petroules.com
Email: [email protected]_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
