----- Original Message -----

> From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> On 9/15/11 3:05 PM, "ext BRM" <[email protected]> wrote:
> [snip]
>> Please don't make Release Configurations overly complex in 
> implementation.
>> That is - there should only be a handful of release configurations:
>> 
>> Windows
>> Mac
>> X11/Wayland/etc
>> Embedded/General (QWS)
>> 
>> Embedded/Symbian
>> Embedded/MeeGo
>> 
>> Each of these ought to be pretty straight forward and contain all modules
>> by default; allowing developers to disable individual ones when they want
>> just like in Qt4.
>> The exception might be Embedded/Symbian and Embedded/MeeGo where
>> QtWidgets might not be used as QtGraphicsWidget+QML is likely the
>> priority and main use there; but even there it should probably be
>> available for developers to enable if desired.
>> 
>> 
>> It would only make things more difficult for people deciding which to use
>> if you have to select from different flavors of Qt; as it is, the above
>> can be problematic enough for Commercial Users - where X11/Mac/Windows
>> while targetting different OS could simply be Qt Desktop instead.
>> 
>> There is not reason to follow Microsoft's lead of splitting Windows into
>> Windows Starter Edition, Windows Home Premium, Windows
>> Professional/Business Edition, Windows Ultimate, and the other variants
>> that I am missing and doing something similar with Qt as that is not
>> useful for developers when it comes to a toolkit.
> 
> I actually want to simplify this significantly. Currently each linux
> distribution usually builds Qt with a whole lot of custom flags. I'd like
> to narrow this down to one standard configuration at least for desktop
> OS'es. 
> 
> On embedded systems, I'd rather like to do the feature selection on the
> module level (ie. leave out QtWidgets if you want, no QtSvg, etc). rather
> than disabling individual features and crippling the libraries.
> 
> The reason is that maintaining the defines for individual features has
> been a huge hazzle in the past. Some configurations where always broken.
> The added value that still was there when you had to fit things into 32MB
> or ROM has mostly disappeared today, and savings for a sensible system
> where not all that big.
> 

I can very well agree on that. I just don't want us to end up in a situation 
where developers are trying to figure out if the "Release" they got has all the 
features they need.
The developer compiling the software should be in charge of it - whether a 
distro or commercial user; but they shouldn't have to go through a major hassle 
to make sure the version they got is what they need - comparison charts should 
not be necessary when selecting a "Release" to use.

For sake of a comparison, kind of like with Windows - if you get the Windows 7 
Business Edition then you don't get the Multimedia stuff that is in Windows 7 
Home Premium, things you might need though for presentations.

Ben

_______________________________________________
Qt5-feedback mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt.nokia.com/mailman/listinfo/qt5-feedback

Reply via email to