I couldn't disagree more and with better support for qmake functionality (such as subdirs) built into Qt Creator then more developers will be attracted to it. qmake is a great build system and Qt Creator hides you from (most) of the details contained in a .pro file so why no go the extra mile here and make the support even better? Simple things such as .lib dependencies, build order, the ability to run unit test projects when they are built, etc. can all be done by hand-crafting .pro files - adding a 'visual' way to do this from Qt Creator would only be a good thing IMHO. I have a team of three using Qt Creator to work on a shared project but until we mastered the qmake internals it was very hard to check out a project and work on it without messing with sessions. I want my team to be able to check out the code, load the .pro file into Qt Creator and see the entire project tree - libs, unit tests, etc. I don't think this is unreasonable.
Following your line of reasoning then why bother letting a user create new projects, classes, etc. at all using Qt Creator? I am Qt Creator's biggest fan and I _hate_ criticising it, but I also want it to be a great success, and improving the project management support would be giant step in the right direction. Until I discovered some of the neat things qmake can do I argued for Visual Studio 'solution' style support on this list - now I see this wouldn't be required as qmake can do everything I need - all I want is some wizards/options that will make this easier for users to do from the IDE. 2009/8/26 Kai Koehne <[email protected]>: > ext Danny Price wrote: >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Vladimir <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Thanks a lot, Danny! >> >> It looks like it works from first sight, but: >> 1) .user file is really huge and contains a lot of strange information >> like my environment variables and absolute paths. So my coworkers >> probably would be unable to checkout the tree and start working. >> >> >> Yes that's why they not suitable for SVN. I'm sure the Trolls have a >> solution in the works :) > > I feel like I have to defend the current approach here. The .user files > are named .user because they are user specific - that is, they are not > meant to be shared between users! The very same is true for the session > files. > > The idea behind this is that QtCreator is (primarily) an editor, not a > build system. You want to use QtCreator to work on your project - great! > Your colleague is a die-hard emacs fan ... well, he should be able to > just work on the project too. Same goes for Visual Studio, Eclipse ... > Forcing anyone who wants to compile your code to use a specific editor > in a specific version is IMO a very bad idea. > > Now one can argue that qmake needs better documentation, or lacks some > functionality when it comes to project dependencies ... but that's > another issue then. > > Regards > > Kai > > NOT an (active) QtCreator developer, just a happy user > > > -- > Kai Koehne > Software Engineer > Nokia, Qt Development Frameworks > > Nokia gate5 GmbH > Firmensitz: Invalidenstr. 117, 10115 Berlin, Germany > Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, Berlin: HRB 106443 B > Umsatzsteueridentifikationsnummer: DE 812 845 193 > Geschäftsführer: Dr. Michael Halbherr, Karim Tähtivuori > _______________________________________________ > Qt-creator mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.trolltech.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator > _______________________________________________ Qt-creator mailing list [email protected] http://lists.trolltech.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
