> On 18 Jan 2019, at 14:26, Simon Hausmann <simon.hausm...@qt.io> wrote: > > > I’m a fan of the idea that for Qt6 we remove all copies of third party > libraries and provide convenient binaries of them in the qt installed (as > separate package in there) as well as via vcpkg for those wanting to build > from source. > > Flex and bison are IMO exactly the same kind of third party software (except > that gnuwin32 offers installer executables). Therefore I suggest to not have > them in a repo but require the presence in the PATH and provide binaries in > the installer.
+1. Lars > > Simon > >> On 18. Jan 2019, at 14:11, Frederik Gladhorn <frederik.gladh...@qt.io> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> I'd like to have some opinions about the gnuwin32 we currently have in >> qt5.git. This way we provide flex and bison for Windows. >> I think it's a bit mis-placed, in my opinion the tools which are needed on >> Windows should be in their own sub-module. >> >> I think we should continue to ship them as dependencies and have them >> available easily for developers. But placing them directly in the qt5 >> repository makes little sense. In Coin we have weird work around and more >> code >> that should be needed to make sure they are always in the right place. >> >> Assuming there are no better ideas, I'll request a new repository soon. >> >> Cheers, >> Frederik >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Development mailing list >> Development@qt-project.org >> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
