Re: Announcing the availability of first Qt 3.3 packages
Brian Nelson writes:
>>>> qt3-apps-dev: stuff you need when you're going to be doing
>>>> special things with embedding Qt designer and stuff. Almost
>>>> noone needs this.
>>
>>> "Special things"? What the hell are "special things"?
>>
>> As I said: embedding Qt designer and stuff.
>>
>>> And the package name in no way suggests any difference from
>>> qt3-dev-tools.
>>
>> Then you should be complaining about the package name, not the fact
>> that the package exists.
> I'm doing both. What does embedding Qt designer mean? Is that
> something that is useful to many people?
Of course it's useful, but not to many people, no. I consider that a
reason to not include it in a general -dev package.
>> For example: you seem to propose to not split out the compat
>> headers, I think this would be a very bad idea, since I rely on
>> this in my qt development to make sure I'm not using obsolete qt
>> headers.
> This was discussed on debian-devel around the time the split was
> going to be made. Several people agreed that there were superior
> alternate ways to accomplish this without splitting out the obsolete
> headers, and consequently breaking the compilation of many packages.
> For instance, you could put #warning pragmas at the top of each
> obsolete header so that the compiler spits out a warning when one is
> used.
I personally fail to see how this would be superior rather than
complementary.
> One of the reasons I'm so ornery when it comes to the Debian Qt
> packages is that much of this stuff was discussed before the split
> and there seemed to be a consensus that there were a lot of problems
> with it, yet it was done anyway without heeding any of the advice.
You don't happen to have a link around, do you ?
>> For another thing, Qt assistant is not only a development tool
>> either. Many Qt apps use it to display their documentation. You
>> would require every user of such apps to install the entire
>> development package.
> Really? I was not aware of this. I don't think it would matter
> much though since I doubt any users other than Qt developers are
> aware of the assistant, and the documentation is in html format
> readable by any web browser anyway.
It's not a matter of being aware of them. The fact is that if you
press "help" in some qt programs, they call the assistant. Users need
it. period.
>> You also seem to ignore non-multithreaded use of the qt libraries,
>> even though there are still applications depending on this.
> Well, there are only 2 packages in Debian still using them (I filed
> bugs to fix all of them)--one appears to have a dead upstream and
> the other has a negligent maintainer.
Non-multithreaded use is discouraged and will be removed in Qt 4.
There's no reason for Debian to remove it earlier. I consider your
bugs invalid.
>> You seem to not want to support embedded cross-development, again
>> without considering people who need this.
> There is already a Qt/Embedded source package in the archive. Can
> that be used in place of the qt3-dev-tools-embedded stuff?
That is Qt/Embedded version 2, this is Qt/Embedded version 3.
>> Summarizing: Qt is a very complex package, and there are good
>> reasons for most, if not all split-ups.
> I'm still unconvinced of that.
Fine, I'm not going to keep arguing with you over this. IMHO, as
you've demonstrated above, you don't seem to know Qt thoroughly enough
to be able to understand the need for the structure of its packages.
>> If you want to help, it would imho be more useful to send Martin
>> patches for some of the real problems, as he has already requested
>> often.
> I have in the past, but they've been rejected (because Ralf Nolden
> is a stubborn flaming nitwit IMNSHO).
Any link on that ?
> I have also been going through bug reports, since many are no longer
> relevant, already fixed. etc.
Great.
cheers
domi
Reply to: