On quinta-feira, 8 de novembro de 2012 15.36.23, Alan Alpert wrote: > But I'm not sure what the usecase is for extending QtQuick1 in Qt5 > only? Isn't the primary point of QtQuick 1 in Qt5 to provide a smooth > migration path? QtQuick 1 in Qt5 is "Done" (unless this has changed), > so if a feature is important enough to ignore that classification in > Qt5, I think it would also be important enough to ignore the done > status of Qt 4. The impression I'm getting is also that it's probably > not important enough to add to QtQuick 1.
"Done" does not mean we can't add small new features, especially if they are convenience for something you can already do by another method. However, Qt 4.8 cannot receive new features nor new symbols. If there were a Qt 4.9, we could add the change there. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
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
