On Tue, 30 Oct 2018 at 01:17, Lars Knoll <lars.kn...@qt.io> wrote: > > Hi all,
Hi Lars, Playing the devil's advocate here. May I ask: Which democratic/meritocratic process was used to take this decision? I do understand that the QtC is the Qbs instigator/maintainer, so nobody can blame you for pulling the plug off and adjusting resources allocation. Who/when/where was the decision of switching to CMake taken? Any trace record? A vote, a ballot, something? I havent's hear of any "Qt Project" event/announcement recently. So far i've seen some broad (but useful) un-authoritative requirements from Thiago, followed by a lengthy (endless) discussion, and suddenly your email that seems to announce the result of the "election". When did the election happened? So some claims that build systems are no "The Qt Company" business, yet you're about to take the road of having to bend a dinosaur (CMake, that's a personal opinion) to suit your modern requirements. Are you planning to have Qt employees fix CMake? Then why spend energy/money to fix something that is broken by design? (Again, that is a personal opinion, if needed to say) No conspiracy here, but i have a few more questions (not related, in no particular order) - Did Jake left the QtC due to your early decision to drop qbs? ( I personally do think that the decision was taken long time ago) - Did you drop Qbs due to it's "unsolvable" dependency on deprecated Qt Script? - Any track record that Qbs was not fit for the job? (Please no "we can't build Qt with it", as you cannot build Qt with anything but qmake right now) Sincerely, Chris _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
