Good initiative. I think this is the right idea. Let's put the coding 
guidelines into .qdoc files after having a decision on the ML. 

We should actually consider having a section about contributing to Qt in our 
documentation. Coding guidelines would fit nicely into that. But I think the 
.qdoc files should rather live in qtdoc instead of qtbase as most of the 
overview documentation is there.



Cheers,
Lars


On 16/03/16 20:47, "Development on behalf of Ziller Eike" 
<[email protected] on behalf of 
[email protected]> wrote:

>
>> On Mar 16, 2016, at 20:33, André Somers <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Op 16/03/2016 om 16:14 schreef Koehne Kai:
>>> Hi there,
>>> 
>>> We have had quite some discussions about the use of C++11 features and 
>>> right API in the past on this mailing list - but if there has been a 
>>> consensus (which is sometimes hard to find out), it was often buried pretty 
>>> deep in the mailing thread. IMO it would be good to make decisions more 
>>> explicit, and write them down also somewhere outside of this list.
>>> 
>>> We already have the coding conventions page: 
>>> https://wiki.qt.io/Coding_Conventions . But we haven't done a good job at 
>>> keeping it up to date - and one reason is IMO that, given that it's a wiki 
>>> everybody can edit, people in a twist of irony stay away from editing it to 
>>> avoid editing wars.
>>> 
>>> I've been contemplating whether we should instead use some more formalized 
>>> decision process. We could have a document uploaded in git, and every 
>>> change needs to be reviewed and approved by Lars. While at it, this fresh 
>>> start would also be a good opportunity to check whether all the rules in 
>>> above wiki page, and the structure of the document in general, can be 
>>> improved.
>>> 
>>> As sort of a demo I created
>>> 
>>> https://github.com/kkoehne/qt-coding-guidelines/blob/master/qt-coding-guidelines.md
>>> 
>>> What do you think? If nobody sees the value in this, I'll refrain from 
>>> sinking more time into it.
>>> 
>> Could work I think. But how do you propose these changes get announced? Who 
>> will be added to review such changes?
>
>Changes should still be discussed on this mailing list first (if they are not 
>cosmetic). These discussions can result with a change on code review (also 
>posted here).
>As something that effects the whole of Qt, it must be reviewed by the Chief 
>Maintainer == Lars.
>
>(My 2c, we do it similar with Qt Creator, seemed to have worked fine enough so 
>far.)
>
>Br, Eike
>
>> André
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Development mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
>
>-- 
>Eike Ziller, Principle Software Engineer - The Qt Company GmbH
> 
>The Qt Company GmbH, Rudower Chaussee 13, D-12489 Berlin
>Geschäftsführer: Mika Pälsi, Juha Varelius, Tuula Haataja
>Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, 
>HRB 144331 B
>
>_______________________________________________
>Development mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Reply via email to