Mandag 20. januar 2014 13.15.46 skrev Kurt Pattyn: > Hi, > > The majority seems to agree that this should NOT go into the QtNetwork > module, but should be an add-on. Votes so far: > > Peter Hartmann: +1 - add-on > Richard Moore: +1 - add-on > Konstantin Ritt: +1 - add-on > Frederik Gladhorn: +1 - add-on > Lars Knoll: +1 - QtNetwork
I think we don't need an actual formal vote but can just agree by consensus. Since there is no danger in keeping it as addon (and if we see a big benefit in moving it to qtbase later), I'd assume this issue has been decided. > Simon Hausmann has questions regarding the QML component: > "Given that there exists a web idl for Web sockets, I suggest the qml api to > consist of a QML element and a Javascript constructor. The prototype and > the qml element should probably have the same api, the web Standard one. It > is in our interest that third-part JS code out there using web sockets can > be used seamlessly in qml.” > > Maybe it is interesting to know that the API of QML module evolved from > ‘function-based’ to ‘declarative-based’ after discussion with Alan Alpert. > To me, the module feels fine, but there is of course much to say about the > standard Web Sockets API as described in http://www.w3.org/TR/websockets/. > I really don’t have an opinion here. Of course, for a first version the QML > module can be left out until the direction is clear on this. What are your > thoughts? I think this is a good idea, let's as a first step focus on getting the C++ API stable and released, then we can add the QML API in the next release when we think that the C++ version is good enough. Greetings, Frederik > > Cheers, > > Kurt -- Best regards, Frederik Gladhorn Senior Software Engineer - Digia, Qt Visit us on: http://qt.digia.com _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
