[maemo-developers] QT Packages, Repositories and PR1.2

[From: Felipe Crochik]

Attila,

Don’t forget that the incoming Qt version is NOT binary (nor source)
> compatible, so you cannot just swap in new libs, you HAVE to use it with the
> libs it was compiled with. Another requirement was parallel installs (very
> atypical for Qt, as on desktops it IS generally binary backward compatible).
>
>

Isn't the Qt version on PR 1.2 supposed to be 4.6.2 (the same we have on
qt4-maemo5 and scratchbox right now)? I can't remember where I read this but
it is my assumption. If not, them very little makes sense to me because the
packages compiled by the autobuilder right now are being build against a qt
version that is never going to be available - these packages would be even
more useless them the ones compiled against the qt4-maemo5


> AFAIK Packages present in the SDK or the core distribution are not
> uploadable to extras-devel. The case you mention is possible only for user
> packages, and we had no precedent for that (in fact, we had cases where
> people took over orphaned packages).
>

Good to know that the "core" packages can't be changed like that. I
recognize that is a good idea to have a different user take over a orphan
package but I would feel better if it was not as simple as submitting a new
package with the same name and higher version. Maybe a consent from the
maintainer or at least a "put package on hold" for few days waiting for a
reply (or lack of) from the maintainer to an email sent automatically from
maemo informing of the change. As now, It all can happen too quickly, in
less than a day someone can submit a package and this package will be
available to the users that have the development catalog. Just my paranoid
self talking... As the community grows it may become more important.


>
> Nokia (the Trolltech people to be more precise) are the maintainers of the
> Qt packages. I think it is a very bad idea to undertake public partisan
> actions with their packages without the consent of the maintainers (though
> it’s not illegal Qt being GPL and all). If anything, we should work together
> to find acceptable solutions to everyone.
>

I am not suggesting doing that despite them... I was actually hoping they
would be around and help out... At the same time I know that they probably
can't endorse this idea on Nokia's behalf or they would have done that
already.


> But what would that solve ? The moment you have PR1.2 released, the devel
> version of Qt will move to 4.7 (you can already download Qt4.7 packages from
> qtlabs that replace libqt4-maemo5). All the cool kids will start coding with
> 4.7 features and you’ll have the same situation.  There will be always a
> ’next’ version devel people play with and end users drool for. Our ’real’
> problem is that of Qt *4.5, the current stable version*, meaning you
> cannot push 4.5 apps to testing/extras. 4.6 is still unreleased and
> unsupported as far as Fremantle goes (that is why the whole PR1.2 SDK thing
> is irrelevant - you can still build Qt4.5 apps, no changes there). The fact
> that 4.6 is vastly superior for developing Fremantle friendly apps is a
> different matter entirely.
>

The issue is not developing for an upcoming version. We will always have the
scenario where there is a stable/official version and a upcoming one. Right
now we have the qt4-core (4.5) and the qt4-maemo5 (4.6) in two different
folders... Everything would be fine if the qt packages included with pr1.2
were the qt4-maemo5 once out they would simply replace the "beta" ones

I may be too naive but I think all this could be much simpler if we just had
each official/major release of qt as a different package and installed to a
different folder. Developers would be able to control the application
dependencies. In fact that is exactly what I think my suggestion would do
now.

By just having the scratchbox qt packages on the device everything would be
good to go, for now, developers would be able to test the "beta" application
against the "upcoming" qt release and worst case scenario after the upcoming
release arrives they would generate a new version of their packages with
different dependencies. Then the new 4.7 packages would have a different
package name and be installed to a different location and we could start the
dance all over again.


> We’re perfectly aware of this and agree that the situation is ’less than
> ideal’ (talk about euphemism), but, to repeat myself, jumping over system
> components without maintainer cooperation is NOT a good idea, either
> technically or community-wise.
>

Again, I am not suggesting a rebellion ... Would be nice if any of the
official "maintainers"  (nokia, qt) could get involved on this discussion if
nothing else as advisers. It just seems to be like a "inexpensive" solution
to a big pain but they would know better about the unintended side effects.

Felipe
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.maemo.org/pipermail/maemo-developers/attachments/20100520/a4d71c39/attachment.htm>