| 1 |
>>>>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2013, Ben de Groot wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Presently we already have a good number of split qt-* library |
| 4 |
> packages in x11-libs. With the arrival of Qt5 upstream has gone a |
| 5 |
> lot further in modularization, so we expect the number of packages |
| 6 |
> to grow much more. We, the Gentoo Qt team, are of the opinion that |
| 7 |
> the time has come to split all these out into their own category. |
| 8 |
> This category is to be used for the various modules and applications |
| 9 |
> that belong to the upstream Qt Framework only (these include e.g. |
| 10 |
> assistant and linguist). Third-party applications should remain in |
| 11 |
> the current categories. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> After some initial bikeshedding we came to the conclusion that |
| 14 |
> naming the category simply "qt" is the most elegant solution. We |
| 15 |
> will then also be dropping the qt- prefix in package names. This |
| 16 |
> means x11-libs/qt-core will be moved to qt/core, and so on. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> Please let us know your thought on this. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-1 |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Please don't invent a new naming scheme. All existing categories |
| 23 |
follow a major-minor naming (except for virtual, and that one has |
| 24 |
historical reasons). |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Apart from this, I also don't think that naming it qt-* would be |
| 27 |
justified. Why can't things stay in x11-libs, together with other |
| 28 |
toolkits? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Ulrich |
Archives