Hello, Why not have both?
A Qt example is essentially a demo, where you are free to use multiple module dependencies. The individual repositories can keep the current code samples and snippets in their own repositories. The problem is that we need to have the freedom to include examples that have dependencies and they do not belong to the individual repositories. So, let's say we have a Media Player example. It depends on core, declarative, components, multimediakit, etc. This example cannot be in the qtbase, qtdeclarative, qtcomponents, qtmultimediakit, and so on. Since it's not documentation either, it shouldn't be in qtdoc. Hence, it should be in some sort of repository where it and others can exist. Just to note, we receive many of these examples and they are needed in the overall Qt 5 landscape. One Qt story is the "porting" story whose content is quite anemic. We receive Qt+SymbianAPI examples which we cannot put into the main Qt 5 repo. We simply ignore them, which is a shame, really. I would like to keep the trivial code into the submodule repository for these reasons: -any bugs on these code will be filed against the module and module maintainers and not the doc team. Developers make them, so they should be responsible for them. There are simply too many to manage in too many repos. The module maintainer should have control of these issues and not the QtDoc or Qt Examples maintainers. -any Qt examples are put into a separate repo, where its maintainer (ie. Casper) can handle the bugs and act like a proper maintainer. The any qt5 module maintainer can simply ignore the Qt examples and they will still have their API, API listing, and their snippets. But the overall Qt 5 product pages and the Qt examples should be separate as they do have multiple dependencies. With regards to definition: Qt Example: "demos" and any other code samples, etc. snippet code: trivial code, code samples. The overlap is intentional. *Don't be afraid of overlap* About the sugar comment. Sugar is good, it attracts people. A product without fluff is not a product. Cheers, Jerome P. ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Alpert Alan (Nokia-MP-Qt/Brisbane) Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2011 9:05 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Qt5-feedback] Moving examples to a separate module 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 _______________________________________________ Qt5-feedback mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback
