On 20/06/2013 16:35, Ziller Eike wrote: > > On 20.06.2013, at 16:05, Nicolas Arnaud-Cormos > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi André, >> >> Thanks for the overview, I'm quite happy seeing Qt Creator taking this >> direction. >> >> On 13/06/2013 16:06, Poenitz Andre wrote: >>> 2. 2.8 + 0.1 makes 3.0, as we use base-9 for version numbers ;-). More >>> seriously, we'd like to make the point that with Android and iOS support we >>> have a new "phase". At the same time we'd like to stiffen the rules on core >>> compatibility to make it easier for 3rdparty plugin developers to keep their >>> plugins working. Current thinking is to aim at source and binary >>> compatibility >>> within a minor series (i.e. 3.0 and 3.0.1 could be interchanged, but not, >>> say, >>> 3.0 and 3.1). >> >>> 5. "committed" maintenance: In preparation of the potential compatibility >>> promises the core interfaces need some auditing, and possibly re-shuffling >>> and "real" documentation. In addition there should be general performance >>> audit/profiling including fixing the most glaring issues that will come up. >> >> The current policy when it comes to plugin API (correct me if I'm wrong) >> is: "make everything private except if it's needed". >> Does that mean that it will change slightly to have useful methods >> public, even if not used? > > No, that policy doesn't change. > The policy that changes a bit is the one that currently says "even public API > can change at any time". > Actually, when public API now has to abide to some rules regarding when it > can be changed, I'd say it is even more important that we don't "wildly" make > API public that might be useful for someone or not ;) > >> To give you an example, the switchHeaderSource is private, but it could >> very be used by 3rd party plugin. > > These can always be discussed and decided on individual basis of course, even > without any policy change, probably with a comment in the code, so it doesn't > get accidentally removed. The argumentation still should be that *someone* > *actually* uses that / wants to use that the moment it is exposed.
Got it, thanks for clarifying. Nicolas -- Join us in October at Qt Developer Days 2013! - https://devdays.kdab.com Nicolas Arnaud-Cormos | [email protected] | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (France) S.A.S., a KDAB Group company Tel. France +33 (0)4 90 84 08 53, Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090 KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-independent software solutions _______________________________________________ Qt-creator mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
