Thiago Macieira wrote: > On sábado, 29 de dezembro de 2012 22.58.49, Kevin Ottens wrote: >> On Saturday 29 December 2012 11:06:30 David Faure wrote: >> > Well, for frameworks that intend to be "as close to Qt as possible" >> > they should do the same (for the convenience of developers who don't >> > use qmake/cmake but set up their project configuration in their IDE by >> > hand, for instance Visual Studio). >> > This means re-adding the missing QtWidgets/ in public headers once Qt5 >> > is required in KF5. >> >> Out of curiosity, is it something which got documented in the Qt project? >> Or that's more a custom? (doesn't make it less valid, I'm being curious >> here and couldn't find the info) > > syncqt complains if public headers have Qt includes that aren't in the > <QtModule/ClassName> or <QtModule/classname.h> form. >
syncqt is a Qt-internal tool. It is relevant to the headers of Qt itself, but not relevant outside it. Thanks, Steve.