On Wed, 14 Sep 2011 22:50:37 ext [email protected] wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to rename the current qt-webkit-examples-and-demos module to > just qtexamples and put ALL examples in there, even the ones that only > depend on a specific module (e.g. only QtCore). > > What this means for the individual modules is that the /examples folder > will disappear and will be put in the qtexamples module. Also most content > from the /doc folder can be moved, since the text belonging with the > examples should probably be in the qtdoc module. > > Advantages: > > * This repo can depend on everything in the CI system, then all > examples are built in one go and we can see errors easier. > * We don't > have examples all over the place, which makes it simpler for me to > maintain, since I only have to look in the qtexamples repo. > * We get a > place for examples that depend on multiple qt5 modules (e.g. QtWidgets and > QtSvg).
I believe these used to be called 'Demos'. I have no objection to placing demos in a separate repo, but they should be practically the only ones that 1) Will not have errors closely linked to module changes (such as API changes or regressions). 2) Might not be directly maintained by the code maintainers. 3) Pull in multiple modules. I strongly support bringing back the concept of demos, distinct from examples. Demos - More well rounded, like a real application, using multiple features and with larger and more complex code. Examples - Very simple code showing off just one small feature, or just one aspect of a large feature. It will not look like a real application, and that's fine. > * The SDK has only one place to look for examples. > > Disadvantages: > > * People have to clone the whole repo for just a few examples. (People > that compile Qt from source will have to live with this, if you use the > SDK this should not impact these people) > * If the API of a module > changes and an example breaks it will not be caught by the CI system the > moment the change is going into mainline. > > I am wondering if any of you has opinions about this? This sounds to me like it's missing a key point of our examples. They aren't just there for documentation, they're also very useful for validation and testing. The examples for a feature are currently one of the few ways we have for the implementer and maintainer of that feature to have it running, on its own, somewhere in the Qt code base. They need to be written by the maintainers because they need to show the way it's meant to be used. And they need to be maintained by the feature maintainers because if the usage pattern evolves that's an important consideration for the API. When they're used like that, then the people who work on those examples already have that repo - and not some generic repo - cloned. The changes to the example will likely follow directly from API changes leading to the aforementioned CI problems. On top of that you won't be sole maintainer of it, which makes some of the advantages less necessary. -- Alan Alpert Senior Engineer Nokia, Qt Development Frameworks _______________________________________________ Qt5-feedback mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback
