Resend from the right email address. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Richard Moore <[email protected]> Date: 17 January 2014 11:25 Subject: Re: [Development] Qt 5.3 Feature freeze is coming quite soon... To: Knoll Lars <[email protected]> Cc: Steve Gold <[email protected]>, Kurt Pattyn <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Heikkinen Jani <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, Thiago Macieira <[email protected]>, Peter Hartmann <[email protected]>
On 17 January 2014 07:54, Knoll Lars <[email protected]> wrote: > > From a feature point of view it would fit best into Qt Network. But it's a > sizeable piece of code added to Qt Network. Do you have any numbers on how > this changes the size of Qt Network? > > Peter and Rich, and comments from your side? > Given that the websocket code contains both C++ networking stuff and also QML it cannot all go into qt network as this would introduce a circular dependency on the qtdeclarative module. This would mean splitting it into two one part in qt network and another in qt declarative which I think would be a bit confusing for users. On the other hand as an addon module the dependency problem is gone and it can be available as a single self-contained module (with unified documentation) which I suspect would be easier on those using the module. I don't think adding QT += websockets to the pro file would be a barrier for adoption. Given the above (and ignoring the issue of code-size etc.) my initial feeling is that an addon module is probably a better choice for users of the module. Cheers Rich. _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
