On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 04:35:25PM +0200, Ville Voutilainen wrote: > On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 at 15:35, Kai Köhne <kai.koe...@qt.io> wrote: > > And again, this is not something limited to Qt. Last time I checked, > > the executable to run Python 3 on Windows is python.exe, not > > python3.exe. On Debian at least it's python3. This hasn't blocked > > Python from being perceived as overall beginner friendly ... > > Uh.. that seems like an apples-and-oranges comparison. On linux, it's > expected and conventional that if you install both python 3 and python > 2, both are available in the usual PATH, neither eclipses the other, > and you can cd between python 2 and python 3 projects and run both, > without switching environments or alternatives in between. > > On windows, I don't know what's conventional. In many cases, a > shortcut is used that launches a command prompt with the right > environment, and using two versions in the same command prompt just > isn't done. > > > So, I would stick to qmake as canonical name, also in the > > documentation. We can mention that it's sometimes called qmake6 on > > Linux. But forcing everyone to change their habit and scripts just > > for the sake of consistency with a fraction of the users that use a > > global installation on Linux, and do not use update-alternatives, is > > IMO not a good move. > > update-alternatives is a long-term system-wide configuration change. > Changing PATH is a shorter-term user-specific one. That's how I switch > between compilers, and I wouldn't dream of using update-alternatives > to switch between them. Especially not on multi-user systems, where > it's none of my business to change the alternative used for a system > compiler for other people. I *can't* do an update-alternatives on a > build server, and I *shouldn't*. That doesn't mean that a build server > installation couldn't have both qt 5 and qt 6 installed in a > system-wide location. > > Switching between qt 5 and qt 6 via update-alternatives is Just Wrong. > If our approach requires it, our approach is broken.
[Responding to a more or less random mail in the thread here] I agree that update-alternatives is Just Wrong for something that should effectively be the user's decision (and not even a decision for all of the user's projects but something that needs to be done case-by-case). On the other hand I don't quite understand all the fuzz about the Correct Global Name. When I as a user am not happy with someone's decision on how to name a binary or if a distribution acts funnily or if I am too lazy to change my muscle memory I set up a shell alias to do what I want. The only problem with that is people looking over my shoulder sometimes wonder why 'n' brings up firefox or 'gh' starts Qt Creator... Andre' _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
