On Sunday 18 January 2015 06:15:45 Kevin Kofler wrote: > I wrote: > > I also see how it happened: You were convinced that it was possible to > > solve the problem in a different way (qtchooser) and so accepted to > > implement that. Unfortunately, that implementation does not fulfill the > > distributions' actual requirements, so we are back to square one. > > PS: Fedora has always had exactly one requirement: that the binaries get the > -qtN suffix (the packaging convention we and other distros have been using > for years, even for Qt 4). Therefore, any solution that does not include > such a suffix does by definition not fulfill our requirements.
Understood, but we need you to be flexible if you want this conversation to continue. -- 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
