So, based on the feedback, can everybody agree on QtWebSockets being an add-on? It keeps the core as is, and provides an opt-in for applications that need it.
Cheers, Kurt > On 17 Jan 2014, at 12:25, Richard Moore <richmoor...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 17 January 2014 07:54, Knoll Lars <lars.kn...@digia.com> wrote: >> >> From a feature point of view it would fit best into Qt Network. But it's a >> sizeable piece of code added to Qt Network. Do you have any numbers on how >> this changes the size of Qt Network? >> >> Peter and Rich, and comments from your side? > > Given that the websocket code contains both C++ networking stuff and > also QML it cannot all go into qt network as this would introduce a > circular dependency on the qtdeclarative module. This would mean > splitting it into two one part in qt network and another in qt > declarative which I think would be a bit confusing for users. > > On the other hand as an addon module the dependency problem is gone > and it can be available as a single self-contained module (with > unified documentation) which I suspect would be easier on those using > the module. I don't think adding QT += websockets to the pro file > would be a barrier for adoption. > > Given the above (and ignoring the issue of code-size etc.) my initial > feeling is that an addon module is probably a better choice for users > of the module. > > Cheers > > Rich. _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
