On quinta-feira, 5 de julho de 2012 04.46.22, lorn.pot...@nokia.com wrote: > On 05/07/2012, at 2:16 PM, ext Thiago Macieira wrote: > > There are no plans to write any class to replace QFuture. However, > > renaming > > the class right now is close to impossible due to source-compatibility > > requirements. > > What are our source compatibility requirements in regards to modules that > came from QtMobility? Are there any at this time? Does this even matter, > really? The blackberry guys would like to add more QSensor's.
As far as I understand, adding new sensors does not break source or even
binary compatibility. The would break feature freeze at this time, though.
All modules should be maintaining source compatibility as closely as possible
with Qt 4. I don't know how that instruction has translated to practical terms
for the formerly Mobility modules. I do know that all the Qt Quick 1 plugins
are gone, replaced with QtQuick2 plugins, so there's a major source
compatibility break there.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
Intel Sweden AB - Registration Number: 556189-6027
Knarrarnäsgatan 15, 164 40 Kista, Stockholm, Sweden
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
