Hi, Where is this new resurrected QtGamepad?
Cheers, BogDan. În ziua de luni, 12 mai 2025, la 13:19:18 Ora de vară a Europei de Est, Andy Nichols via Development a scris: > I’m a bit confused about what’s being proposed/discussed here. We did > revive QtGamepad, in so far as we integrated the changes I proposed a > couple of years ago. That includes a module for recreating 95% of the same > API that was in QtGamepad in Qt 5.x, as well as many additional features > that have been requested during the lifetime of QtGamepad (support for all > joystick-like controllers with a lower level API exposing buttons and > axis’s etc). However, the QtGamepad module is not part of Qt 6, so it > doesn’t have access to the CI infrastructure so it can and does break. I’m > not sure what is being proposed then. Why not just propose that the > QtGamepad module be again included in qt5.git (qt6) and re-added to the > CI/packaging infrastructure? > > So that is if we’re considering giving official status to a “legacy” port of > the 5.15 version, I would rather us opt for just re-elevating qtgamepad as > it stands in the official repo now and preparing that one for release as > part of Qt 6. > > Regards, > Andy Nichols > > From: Development <development-boun...@qt-project.org> on behalf of Liang Qi > <cavendish...@gmail.com> Date: Monday, 12 May 2025 at 11:00 > To: Arno Rehn <a.r...@menlosystems.com> > Cc: development@qt-project.org <development@qt-project.org> > Subject: Re: [Development] Resurrecting QtGamepad > > 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://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit > > >>> hub.com%2Fpumphaus%2Fqtgamepadlegacy&data=05%7C02%7C%7Cb222e1e6351a458 > > >>> f140d08dd91336fbe%7C20d0b167794d448a9d01aaeccc1124ac%7C0%7C0%7C6388263 > > >>> 72334475966%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLj > > >>> AuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7 > > >>> C&sdata=%2ByPNf38Bt4VRpne2ADYmu4sH4%2BAfbq0UwZZh6djfIw0%3D&reserved=0< > > >>> 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://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub > > > .com%2Fqt%2Fqtgamepad%2Fcommits%2Fdev%2F&data=05%7C02%7C%7Cb222e1e6351a4 > > > 58f140d08dd91336fbe%7C20d0b167794d448a9d01aaeccc1124ac%7C0%7C0%7C6388263 > > > 72334498612%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAu > > > MDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sd > > > ata=Bny1n%2Bs1PUKz4CNP51kGATicN5VL6NX7D5BtF57OxSo%3D&reserved=0<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 -- Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
