On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 10:27 AM, Tomasz Siekierda <[email protected]> wrote: > On 8 April 2015 at 17:35, Oswald Buddenhagen > <[email protected]> wrote: >> 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: >>> 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 > > I like QtQuick.LightControls. > > In general, since both sets are drastically different (in way they > look like, in the way they perform, in styling capabilities, etc.) I > do not think giving them similar names (Controls 1 and Controls 2) is > a good idea - it may strongly confuse the users. Not everybody follows > the mailing list and blog, so if you name them similarly you can > expect a flood of questions like "I'm trying to use the new Controls, > but X does not work, and Y looks different, while Z can't read my > style definition" etc.
I'd say it's a matter of whether the current QtQuick Controls will become deprecated (or considered Done). If that's the case, then the new component is the clear N+1 version. Also another question is whether they can be mixed. If they can be mixed then you'll want different names. Aleix _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
