On Mon, 12 May 2025 at 10:32, Arno Rehn <a.r...@menlosystems.com> wrote: > > On 07.05.2025 21:38, Liang Qi wrote: > > On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 at 10:40, Oswald Buddenhagen > > <oswald.buddenha...@gmx.de> wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 10:33:27PM +0100, Arno Rehn wrote: > >>> On 24.10.23 21:12, Arno Rehn wrote: > >>>> On 22.10.23 20:57, Andy Nichols wrote: > >>>>> Ideally if QtGamepad is reintroduced in Qt6 it would be with some > >>>>> flavor of these changes rather than just being a strait port form Qt 5. > >>>> > >>>> Agreed. Maybe I'll just push my port to github then, renamed as > >>>> qtgamepad-legacy or so. > >>> > >>> Pushed it here: https://github.com/pumphaus/qtgamepadlegacy > >>> Renamed the whole thing to QtGamepadLegacy, so there should be no > >>> compatibility issues with the "actual" QtGamepad when it is released. > >>> > >> from a qt project policy pov, nothing speaks against pushing it to the > >> main repo as 6.x-legacy-api or some such. this would give it broader > >> exposure, and it could get a proper review on gerrit. > > > > There is not much activity since > > https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtgamepad/+/495313 , see > > https://github.com/qt/qtgamepad/commits/dev/ . > > > > +1 for pushing qtgamepadlegacy to 6.x-legacy-api, and it will get > > broader exposure. Arno, thanks for your effort. > > Cool, so just a new branch 6.x-legacy-api? Should the "x" follow Qt's > minor release, so we'll have 6.9-legacy-api, 6.10-legacy-api, etc pp? > > I guess it'll need the occasional adjustment to changed CMake API, so a > completely static 6.x-legacy-api will likely not be possible. >
The refactoring is not done yet, so just rename the dev branch to refactoring or something else. I think we can keep current branch names for the QtGamePad legacy api, and perhaps we don't need to have binary compatibility promise here. --Liang -- Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
