On domingo, 9 de setembro de 2012 11.46.31, Boudewijn Rempt wrote: > > Preferably, it should be fixing it once and for all. > > Well, given that Digia actually seems to have a patch for the bug in > question, I'd say that the choice is easy. Use the bug fix. If Qt goes > down the way of "it's better to break existing applications than to allow > in a patch not everybody likes", then Qt will lose its reputation for > dependability completely.
It's not a bugfix, it's a hack. A proper fix is required.
> > The other extreme is to
> > disable it completely.
>
> Which is of course even more unacceptable. Breaking applications by
> removing a feature that's been around for many years is even worse.
I'm sorry, I disagree. On one end of the spectrum, we have applications that
are broken. On the other end, we'll break some others.
We're between a rock and a hard place, until someone fixes the bug. But until
then, I'll side with the "make regular applications work" like Qt Creator.
> If there's api for something, it is unreasonable to say that the feature
> doesn't exist. Not having tablet support on Windows and OSX while having
> QTabletEvent in the api is a bug. There's a promise that something should
> work, and it doesn't work.
No, it's not. When we added support for touch events in Qt 4.5, we had support
on Mac OS X and on Windows, but not on Linux. Was that a bug? No, it was an
unimplemented feature (in this case because the X11 guys hadn't got their act
together until earlier this year).
Still, it doesn't matter what you call it, it's still not implemented and I
don't see anyone volunteering to fix it.
--
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
