Hello folks, On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Martin Jansa <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 01:27:22PM -0500, Trevor Woerner wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > > > question: > > Should some version of Qt be included in openembedded-core, or should > > all recipes to add Qt be part of their own version-specific Qt layer? > > > > > > background: > > openembedded-core[1] used to include recipes for Qt3, but as Qt3 became > > old these recipes were replaced with Qt4 and the Qt3 support was broken > > out into its own layer[2]. We're now at a point where Qt4 is getting old > > and Qt5 is "current". At some point we'll have to replace the Qt4 > > support in [1] with support for Qt5. But we expect users will still want > > to use Qt4, so if the Qt4 support in [1] is replaced by support for Qt5, > > the Qt4 support will need to be broken out into its own layer. Qt5 > > support is currently being developed on it's own layer[3]. > > > > > > This email thread is *not* to discuss when we should replace Qt4 with > > Qt5, then question is: should [1] include *any* Qt support, or should Qt > > be always in its own layer to be added as required by the distribution? > > > > > > If we decide [1] should provide some Qt support, then we can discuss > > when we should replace the Qt4 support with Qt5 in [1]. But for now it > > would be nice to reach a consensus on whether or not [1] should include > > any Qt support at all or if it wouldn't just be easier to always have Qt > > support in its own version-specific layers to be added as required (if > > needed) by the distribution configuration. > > I would like to see qt4 moved from oe-core to meta-qt4. > > That would remove the feeling that using oe-core defaults to using qt4 > and it would be consistent with other QT layers: > > meta-qt3 > meta-qt4 > meta-qt5 > Agreed. > oe-core would stay just the "core" and if you need any QT you can select > which one suits your needs the most (or combination of e.g. qt4+qt5 like > most people are using now) > > With PACKAGECONFIGs which can list optional dependencies which aren't > included in the the layer itself it's now easier to have recipe with > optional qt5 support in oe-core, but qt5 itself in separate meta-qt5. > > Another interesting aspect is that with qt4 we have only 6 recipes in > openembedded-core/meta/recipes-qt/qt4 > > while > meta-qt5/recipes-qt/qt5 has 25 different recipes (many of them with > _git.bb variant so 42 in total). And splitting the qt5 recipes (e.g. to > have only qtbase, qtdeclarative in oe-core and "additional" modules in > separate meta-qt5) isn't very good, because they are quite tightly > coupled (so upgrading recipes in meta-qt5 would be in many cases > incomatible with qtbase version in oe-core and vice-versa). > > Another advantage of separate meta-qt5 layer is that in many projects > people are using older oe-core release (e.g. dylan) with newer meta-qt5 > (e.g. dora or master or even qt5-5.2.0 branch), with separate layer it's > easier to mix them. > Fully agreed. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
