| 1 |
On 20 January 2013 05:03, Philip Webb <purslow@××××××××.net> wrote: |
| 2 |
> 130119 Ben de Groot wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 19 January 2013 21:46, Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> Maybe lib-qt ? dev-qt sounds confusing to me too, what's "dev" about it? |
| 5 |
>> These are libraries and applications |
| 6 |
>> that are used by developers of end-user applications. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> They are also encountered by users when updating KDE etc. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Not directly, only as dependencies. A simple world update will do what |
| 11 |
is needed. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
And otherwise this is more precise and concise: |
| 14 |
emerge -au1 `eix --only-names -IC qt` |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
>> If there is too much opposition to a simple "qt" category |
| 17 |
>> -- at least there seems to be some quite vocal opposition -- , |
| 18 |
>> then dev-qt is in my eyes the next best alternative. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> 'qt' alone is inconsistent with the rest of the tree. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Not really. We already have virtual/. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
>> A third option we came up with is qt-framework. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> Too long to type & again no parallel in the existing tree. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
But closer to upstream naming. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
>> Somewhat comparable categories in the current tree |
| 31 |
>> are dev-dotnet and gnustep-{base,libs}. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> Flame-eyes' suggestion is simple, consistent & involves least change : |
| 34 |
> 'x11-qt/qt-core' 'x11-qt/qt-gui' etc. Please do it like that. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Most of Qt has nothing whatsoever to do with X11 directly, and that |
| 37 |
will increasingly be true for Qt5 with its Wayland support. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
Cheers, |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
Ben | yngwin |
| 43 |
Gentoo developer |
| 44 |
Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin |
Archives