On terça-feira, 22 de maio de 2012 11.16.31, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 08:32:31AM -0700, ext Girish Ramakrishnan wrote: > > It would be nice if we can make things simpler for all distros by > > renaming our tools. > > > > What do we gain from keeping the same name for all our tools across > > major versions? > > we don't complicate our own release process with a downstream issue. > we don't complicate things for non-distro users.
Aren't the two statements contradictory?
if we don't complicate things for non-distro users, then it stands to reason
that we want to facilitate for distro users. Then we do care about a
downstream issue.
> also, we are not going to call our tools moc-qt5, etc., as that's just
> ugly. as many distros do just that, so we would break their "standard"
> anyway.
I agree it's ugly, but it is what Linux users are likely to find. Should we not
standardise on that?
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
Intel Sweden AB - Registration Number: 556189-6027
Knarrarnäsgatan 15, 164 40 Kista, Stockholm, Sweden
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
