On Tuesday, May 27, 2014 11:08:12 Thiago Macieira wrote: > > > > > > The library filenames for Enginio do not have a version in their basename > > at all, as was discussed and actioned for all modules before Qt 5.0. Is > > that a mistake, or is this stuff a free-for-all for all new modules? > > The source version number is only required once you break source > compatibility, so it's technically not required now.
The '5' makes sense because it is 'part of Qt5'. It is part of the distribution. > > However, I question why we have a Qt module that doesn't have "Qt" in the > name. So far, we know it is deliberate. We don't know if it was a mistake, and we don't know if naming things is a free-for-all. Lars: Can you answer? Is there a way to name include directories and libraries or is it a free-for-all? Can future modules be expected to follow any naming conventions, or is it expected that they can be named anything? Thanks, -- Join us at Qt Developer Days 2014 in Berlin! - https://devdays.kdab.com Stephen Kelly <[email protected]> | Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company www.kdab.com || Germany +49-30-521325470 || Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090 KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-Independent Software Solutions _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
