+1 for moving those to separate repo (as basically those are more sophisticated 
examples)

The only question I've is Neptune3 UI still being kept alive (those were 
consumed there


--​

Przemysław Nogaj

Head of HMI Technology



t:   +48 729 043 291<tel:+48729043291>
m: p...@spyro-soft.com
<mailto:n...@spyro-soft.com>w: www.spyro-soft.com<http://www.spyro-soft.com/> | 
LinkedIn<https://www.linkedin.com/company/spyrosoft/>



________________________________
From: Development <development-boun...@qt-project.org> on behalf of Maurice 
Kalinowski via Development <development@qt-project.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 8:01:40 PM
To: Tor Arne Vestbø <tor.arne.ves...@qt.io>; Tuukka Turunen 
<tuukka.turu...@qt.io>
Cc: Macieira, Thiago <thiago.macie...@intel.com>; development@qt-project.org 
<development@qt-project.org>
Subject: Re: [Development] Requesting a repository for Qt Interface Framework 
Reference APIs

⚠ This email originates from outside the organization or the sender could not 
be verified.

You are absolutely correct that this module started with a pure automotive 
focus, back then called Qt IVI.

However, we recognized that its functionality can also be utilized in a generic 
way, which was the reason for the rename and generalization efforts done in the 
past. There might still be some leftovers.



There are developers/customers using it in their production environment 
already, also outside of the automotive sector.



BR,

Maurice





From: Development <development-boun...@qt-project.org> On Behalf Of Tor Arne 
Vestbø via Development
Sent: Thursday, 7 December 2023 18:37
To: Tuukka Turunen <tuukka.turu...@qt.io>
Cc: Macieira, Thiago <thiago.macie...@intel.com>; development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] Requesting a repository for Qt Interface Framework 
Reference APIs



If it’s an option to rename this module we should take the opportunity to do so 
I think.



The problem of the generic naming came up in the past, but the understanding 
was that it was too late to change.



If that is not the case after all, we should strongly consider it.



The documentation at https://doc.qt.io/QtInterfaceFramework/ describes it as:



"The Qt Interface Framework module provides both the tools and the core APIs, 
for you to implement Middleware APIs, Middleware Back ends, and Middleware 
Services. “



So is this the Qt Middleware module?



On the other hand, the module seems to also provide a lot more than just core 
primitives. E.g. this set of classes for in-viechle infotainment systems:



https://doc.qt.io/QtInterfaceFramework/qtifmedia-module.html




So is this a Qt for Automotive specific module? These APIs seem to indicate 
that as well:



https://doc.qt.io/QtInterfaceFramework/qtinterfaceframework-vehiclefunctions-qmlmodule.html



If we do want to promote this to a Qt module, should the core functionality be 
split off, and the rest stay Qt for Automotive specific?



https://doc.qt.io/QtInterfaceFramework/qtinterfaceframework-module.html



Cheers,

Tor Arne



On 7 Dec 2023, at 17:02, Tuukka Turunen via Development 
<development@qt-project.org<mailto:development@qt-project.org>> wrote:



Hi,



Thiago is right, we can change the name as the module technically is not part 
of Qt release 
(https://download.qt.io/official_releases/qt/6.6/6.6.1/submodules/).



That said, we can also decide not to change the name. Like mentioned by 
Dominik, it has existing since a while with the current name 
(https://doc.qt.io/QtInterfaceFramework/) and repository 
(https://code.qt.io/cgit/qt/qtinterfaceframework.git/). Initially it had a 
different name, so the current one is already a new name, which is probably 
better than the initial at least.



So the question is what should this module be called, if it would be renamed? 
And another question, is it feasible to implement the renaming at this point?



Moving the proposed items out from it to labs modules makes sense to me. The 
naming of labs modules should then be aligned with the new naming of the module.



Yours,



                Tuukka



From: Development 
<development-boun...@qt-project.org<mailto:development-boun...@qt-project.org>> 
on behalf of Thiago Macieira 
<thiago.macie...@intel.com<mailto:thiago.macie...@intel.com>>
Date: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 at 19:06
To: development@qt-project.org<mailto:development@qt-project.org> 
<development@qt-project.org<mailto:development@qt-project.org>>
Subject: Re: [Development] Requesting a repository for Qt Interface Framework 
Reference APIs

On Tuesday, 5 December 2023 08:54:29 PST Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Then why are you asking for a repository if it's already there? When was
> that module approved by the Qt Project? I can't find anything in the email
> archives.
>
> The first commit in this repository is "First version of the QtGeniviExtras
> module". When was it renamed and who approved it?

This module was requested at
https://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2015-August/022859.html

There were no objections. Tuukka said it's a good idea to have the modules
even if they aren't part of the released packages:

> I think it is fine to create the requested repo for new module. Depending on
> the need it can then either be included or not be included in the release
> packages.

That would explain why this isn't in the qt5.git/.gitmodules.

But I said:

> I am, however, questioning the design of the API that Dominik presented.

There have been zero other discussions of "genivi" since then
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dgenivi%2Bsite%25253Ahttps%25253A%25252F%25252Flists.qt-project.org%25252Fpipermail%25252Fdevelopment%25252F&data=05%7C01%7Ctuukka.turunen%40qt.io%7Cc5d9d74e44014c5e22c308dbf5b48c59%7C20d0b167794d448a9d01aaeccc1124ac%7C0%7C0%7C638373928019928582%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=r0fpIXCgLTyWGtC9bIJ9waV7QgvH6J%2FnwRLJ%2BZMPL9k%3D&reserved=0<https://www.google.com/search?q=genivi+site%253Ahttps%253A%252F%252Flists.qt-project.org%252Fpipermail%252Fdevelopment%252F>

I don't know what kind of API reviews have been done since. But there has been
no discussion about renaming this module. Therefore, the name it is currently
using is unauthorised and does not imply a precedent.

-1 on this new module with this name.


--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com<http://intel.com/>
  Cloud Software Architect - Intel DCAI Cloud Engineering

--
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org<mailto:Development@qt-project.org>
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development



Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
________________________________
This e-mail (including any attachments) is intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential 
information. This message is not a binding agreement and does not conclude an 
agreement without the express confirmation of the sender’s superior or a 
director of the company.
If you are not the intended recipient, you should immediately notify the sender 
and delete the message along all the attachments. Any disclosure, copying, 
distribution or any other action is prohibited and may be illegal. No e-mail 
transmission can be guaranteed to be 100% secure or error-free, as information 
could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or 
contain viruses. Although Spyrosoft has taken precautions to ensure that this 
e-mail is free from viruses, the company does not accept liability for any 
errors or omissions in the content of this message, which arise as a result of 
the e-mail transmission. This e-mail is deemed to be professional in nature. 
Spyrosoft does not permit the employees to send emails which contravene 
provisions of the law.
-- 
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Reply via email to