On sexta-feira, 6 de julho de 2012 02.39.14, Laszlo Papp wrote: > > Yes, it might be a sad conclusion for your project, but it is probably a > > happy conclusion overall. > > As far as I see, way more people wanted to have more in common as a > collaborative way than not.
Which is irrelevant because this is not a democracy.
I expect everyone, including those who want the feature (in fact, especially
those people) to think of the overall goals and quality of the API. Think
long-term.
> Well, I did say my use cases, and what I would need (float and
> integers), so I do not understand this comment. Not to mention, I did
> say in my first email, what I should change during the porting effort
> about getting this UI free.
But you failed to indicate how you'd address the main issue of it using float,
which leads me to believe you did not do a thorough investigation of the API
and the internals before you made your proposal. As such, I feel very
comfortable in blocking this now: without the pressure of Qt 5.0, you have
more time to design a better API.
--
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
