On Friday 14 November 2014 07:58:43 Jake Petroules wrote: > Yeah, Qt plugins should absolutely be packaged as bundles (loadable > modules). I’ve mentioned this before; I think this is a good next aim for > 5.5. Shouldn’t be much more work than changing the extension from .dylib to > .bundle and adding the -bundle linker flag, though they should be actual > CFBundles too, not just flat files. I reopened the issue.
The problem is pushing this change to everyone else, in both accounts: 1) People package Qt plugins by other means besides macdeployqt, which means their scripts may fail if we rename our plugins 2) User applications have plugins of their own For #1, I think proper warning in the changelog should be enough. For #2, I'm not sure. Now, question: is this worth it? -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
