On Wednesday, 17 February 2021 08:13:41 PST Kai Köhne wrote: > Anyhow, now that we've been both venting our frustration a bit: As Joerg > already pointed out, I'm completely fine with the patch he has prepared, > and certainly do hope that distributions make use of it. I'm just > disagreeing with the request that the Qt documentation need also state > 'qmake6' everywhere, and that the Qt SDK (as provided by the online > installer) needs to contain 'qmake6', too.
The documentation needs to reflect reality. If there are sufficient builds that do rename (and there will be), the documentation should mention. I think this is something we can agree on. I won't opine on the SDK from TQtC. I don't use it as it isn't meant for developers of Qt. And since it can't be anonymously downloaded any more, I probably never will either. It's your choice whether to apply the naming the majority chooses. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel DPG Cloud Engineering _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development