[maemo-community] "Community service pack"

From: Felipe Crochik felipe at crochik.com
Date: Mon Dec 13 19:41:25 EET 2010
My main concern is that qt (and especially mobility) is evolving on much
faster pace then we should expect to see "PR"s. 

Between PR1.2 and 1.3 I had my own "mobility" backend within my application
just because the code had been vastly improved and lots of bugs fixed. I
imagine that if each developer takes the same route the problem will be much

I am less concerned with the proper "extras". I guess as long as we can have
the bleeding edge version of qt as "experimental" and we can have qt
applications that depend on them make all the way to "extras-testing" we
would have enough.

Most users would stick to "tested" applications that will depend on the
"official" qt. Power users and developers will be able to move on with the
development and testing and have everything ready for when "the next pr

I would like to get to a point that the version on extras-devel of
qt-experimental release every week or couple of weeks. Maemo is probably the
best mobile platform for qt development right now.


-----Original Message-----
From: maemo-community-bounces at maemo.org
[mailto:maemo-community-bounces at maemo.org] On Behalf Of Ville M. Vainio
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 11:36 AM
To: List for community development
Subject: Re: "Community service pack"

On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 5:05 PM, Felipe Crochik <felipe at crochik.com> wrote:

> I don't know what the libqt4-bearer-hotfix entails but just saw this

The hotfix fixes the problem where qml apps can't load Image's that
have remote url as a source.

> My last comment was exactly about who is/will be in charge of distributing
> the qt packages (the community or nokia)?

Nokia is & probably will be for the official Qt packages (4.7.0). Qt
is such a critical thing for the whole developer experience that I'm
not sure it's a good idea to deviate on that too much.

> It would be great if we could, at least, manage the "experimental"
> (or have nokia update them very often) so developers could always count on
> having the last fixes. Most applications would rely on the "official"

If we have those "experimental" packages with small fixes, and some
apps end up using them, we run the risk of massive memory bloat (which
manifests as those annoying swappy moments on the device) when two
versions of Qt are loaded up at the same time, for possibly no good
reason. So applications shouldn't use the experimental packages unless
they absolutely need them (i. I'd be more interested in the
experimental packages when Qt 4.8 comes out), and never consider them
"better" than the official version.

That being said, it's easy to have those experimental packages in
extras, co-existing with system Qt packages.

> packages but any application that is not critical or that depends on a
> after the last release could depend on the experimental packages.
> Do we have any restrictions on promoting packages that depend on "qt
> experimental"?

There is no reason to block apps using them from getting promoted. It
was done w/ the old qt4-maemo5 because nokia was going to release Qt
4.6 in pr 1.2 anyway.

Ville M. Vainio @@ Forum Nokia
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community at maemo.org

More information about the maemo-community mailing list