On 2018-08-02 09:03, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 10:33:43AM -0400, Matthew Woehlke wrote: >> On 2018-08-01 04:24, Jason Newton wrote: >>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 1:30 PM Matthew Woehlke wrote: >>>> Persistent build server? Java? No, thanks. >>> >>> This is an option, you can keep it in a preference file, or you can >>> use it as a command line switch to not use this. >> >> ...and how many naïve users that "just want to build Qt" are going to >> know about that? >> > and why exactly would a user who doesn't care ... care?
...because building Qt just spawned a process that is never going to terminate, is going to sit around pointlessly monitoring their file system, and is going to potentially cause who-knows-what issues? If I want to just download and build some package (i.e. I'm not *actively developing* that software), doing so shouldn't "infect" my machine with zombie processes. When the build is done, it should be *done*. > it's not that i *like* big dependencies, but there is a trade-off to be > made, and bazel is *by far* the most advanced build tool on the market > today when it comes to optimizing rebuilds of massive projects ...which is *totally irrelevant* to everyone that is not a Qt developer. Just like software is written once and read many times, it is developed by a few and deployed by many. Optimizing for development *at the expense* of deployment strikes me as... questionable. If the penalty to deployment cost was minimal, that would be one thing, but with bazel, it isn't. -- Matthew _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development