On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 04:39:52PM +0200, Frederik Gladhorn wrote: > On Wednesday, April 08, 2015 04:30:23 PM Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > > what's the point of keeping them in the same repo when you split it at > > the top anyway? you just break the uniformity of the repo layout, which > > is both ugly and traditionally a nightmare build system wise (cf. > > webkit). > > The idea was to make code-sharing easy > is this actually planned? is it expect to happen to a significant degree? if the answer is yes, then the top-level split is not the right way to go anyway.
> and to lessen the burden on everyone to check out yet another > repository etc. > this doesn't sound all that convincing. > As for the build system, I see it similar to how the qt5.git meta module > behaves - just two subdirs for the qtquickcontrols repo and that's it. > i'm already having nightmares. > It seems that re-using the name will also cause trouble with > documentation and tooling, > documentation and any kind of use works on the module level, not at the repo level. > so ideally we find the perfect new name for both module and > repository. Sadly we didn't manage to come up with a great name in a > few hours of brain storming. > i think quick controls 2 will work just fine. it's not like people are not used to "asynchronous" versioning in the qt quick world. but anyway, here are some more ideas: - the classic: qt quick controls NG - the diet: qt quick controls light - the thesaurus: qt quick widgets - the cynic: qt quicker controls _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
