On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 at 15:35, Kai Köhne <[email protected]> wrote:
> And again, this is not something limited to Qt. Last time I checked, the 
> executable to run Python 3 on Windows is python.exe, not python3.exe. On 
> Debian at least it's python3. This hasn't blocked Python from being perceived 
> as overall beginner friendly ...

Uh.. that seems like an apples-and-oranges comparison. On linux, it's
expected and conventional that if you install both
python 3 and python 2, both are available in the usual PATH, neither
eclipses the other, and you can cd between python 2
and python 3 projects and run both, without switching environments or
alternatives in between.

On windows, I don't know what's conventional. In many cases, a
shortcut is used that launches a command prompt
with the right environment, and using two versions in the same command
prompt just isn't done.

> So, I would stick to qmake as canonical name, also in the documentation. We 
> can mention that it's sometimes called qmake6 on Linux. But forcing everyone 
> to change their habit and scripts just for the sake of consistency with a 
> fraction of the users that use a global installation on Linux, and do not use 
> update-alternatives, is IMO not a good move.

update-alternatives is a long-term system-wide configuration change.
Changing PATH is a shorter-term user-specific one. That's how I switch
between compilers, and I wouldn't dream of using update-alternatives
to switch between them. Especially not
on multi-user systems, where it's none of my business to change the
alternative used for a system compiler
for other people. I *can't* do an update-alternatives on a build
server, and I *shouldn't*. That doesn't mean that
a build server installation couldn't have both qt 5 and qt 6 installed
in a system-wide location.

Switching between qt 5 and qt 6 via update-alternatives is Just Wrong.
If our approach requires it, our approach
is broken.
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Reply via email to