On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 14:45:59 ext Mark Constable wrote: > On 2011-09-15 05:07 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > >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. > > > > Just to put more weight behind Alan's argument. I fully agree with > > his statement. The disadvantages are far more significant than the > > benefits. I would go as far as saying that the main purpose of the > > example is quick testing and the doc aspect is just sugar on top. > > Let's not make the current repo split situation worse than it is > > already. > > OTOH it could be useful for the developer to know their example code > will build and run outside of their cosey checkout and, perhaps, > encourage them to interact with the other code examples as well. It's > a bit more bother for individual developers but the overall health of > all the examples may improve. >
You're thinking of demos. Examples should be so simple and single-minded that it's pointless to interact with other examples. Or even other repositories. Now if we had demos again, they could interact with other examples and verify that things run against a full and common checkout or something. But the extra complexity is only going to confuse the matter for a example that's trying to demonstrate/test a single thing with utmost clarity. -- Alan Alpert Senior Engineer Nokia, Qt Development Frameworks _______________________________________________ Qt5-feedback mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback
