Hi,
> > At least on linux, I would consider it messy to have the soname
> > (technical version) not in sync with the release/documented version.
> > It would be bad to have a "release numbers translation table", even
> > worse to have versions resembling the original Qt versions.
> It's quite common that the soname is different from the documented project
> version. KDE for example has been doing it for years with its libraries :)
I agree with Simon. QtWebKit project/package not only delivers
QtWebKit.{so/dll} but also other binaries like the QML plugin, platformplugin,
etc.. Versions are not aligned (and they should not be) for all these
libraries; this was another reason to decouple QtWebKit project/package version
from the QtWebKit.{so/dll} binary version.
Also, decoupling QtWebKit project/package versions from main Qt releases was
another conscious decision, aligned with
http://labs.qt.nokia.com/2010/10/26/qt-is-going-modular/ (this is no different
than QtMobility versioning).
I agree though that aligning the major version numbers between the QtWebKit
project version (2.1) and the main binary deliverable (QtWebKit.{so/dll}) might
make sense. Perhaps we can bring the two together for 5.0.
Laszlo
_______________________________________________
webkit-qt mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-qt
