On 7 Dec 2023, at 20:01, Maurice Kalinowski via Development
<development@qt-project.org> wrote:
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> 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> on behalf
of Thiago Macieira <thiago.macie...@intel.com>
*Date:*Tuesday, December 5, 2023 at 19:06
*To:*development@qt-project.org<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://www.google.com/search?q=genivi+site%253Ahttps%253A%252F%252Flists.qt-project.org%252Fpipermail%252Fdevelopment%252F
<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
<https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development>
--
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
