Thank you again everyone for the suggestions. Most people have agreed that there is a need for simplifying the repo nomenclature, build system, and scripts. This will attract contributions from more Qt developers. People who have been using Qt for years are familiar with the submodules, and the scripts. However, when a new person tries to contribute, they often get confused with the existing complexities.
Adding inputs from Andy and Volker below: Andy Nichols : *"So let's have the discussion then. Qt is already ridiculously hard to build and contribute to for new-commers not already well acquainted with the arcane knowledge without additional silliness like this. Qt 6 has been released, so it's a bit ridiculous at this point to still point contributors at the qt5.git super module to contribute to Qt 6.qt = qt4qt5 = qt5 and qt6 (depends on branch).We could come up with a solution that avoids this. Why not just have a new supermodule specifically for Qt6 or for even lower effort have an alias repo called qt6. It's such a small thing in practice, but it causes unnecessary confusion for those not already in-the-know."* Volker Hilsheimer: *"Given that there’ll be a Qt 7 and Qt 8, and perhaps not only after 7 years, I’d prefer a “qt. git” which contains only the .gitmodules file (plus needed LICENSE files), and whatever “bootstrapping” script and README we want to help with our somewhat special git setup (gerrit specific hooks; our commit templates; ssh configuration since our gerrit server listens on port 29418, and requires a special cypher to be used; that we want people to pull from code.qt.io <http://code.qt.io> rather than from gerrit; etc).* *I don’t quite understand why all those Qt 5 branches will confuse people; if you look for branches, use grep or whatever. So, I’d rather rename today’s qt.git to qt4.git, and qt5.git to qt.git. Or as a second option rename qt.git to qt4.git and then start with a fresh qt.git."* Qt5 repo contains many branches and some have ambiguous names with respect to the Qt version. e.g: It is not clear whether the *dev *branch is applicable to Qt5 development or Qt6. Since Qt6 is a major change with the removal of obsolete modules, there can be confusion while submitting bug fixes. When Qt7 comes and Qt5 officially gets abandoned, then people who want to use Qt5 can still keep it maintained without creating further confusion. We will wait for the Qt maintainers to take a call on this topic and let us know the decision. Best Regards, Nibedit On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 12:51 PM Nibedit Dey <nibedit....@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you everyone for the suggestions. > I posted in the development group as there was less participation on the > topic in the interest group. > Below are my suggestions: > > - Create a clean qt6 supermodule for better maintainability. It's > still not too late. > - If the qt5 supermodule is renamed, then it will still have many qt5 > branches. This may create confusion while looking for specific branches. > - The use of a script is a good idea, but it needs to be mentioned in > the README document. Else new Qt developer or contributors may face > difficulties while building from source. > > Any thoughts? > > Best Regards, > Nibedit > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 4:06 PM Nibedit Dey <nibedit....@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hello Everyone, >> >> Is there any plan to move the qt6 source code to a different repo (qt6)? >> Currently, the branch lies inside the qt5 repo. >> Is there going to be a Qt6 super module in near future? >> >> Thanks & Regards, >> Nibedit >> >
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development