-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
Dear all, in the next days/weeks, Slavek and I will be doing some qt->tqt renaming in the master branch. This may affect package building and cause unwanted FTBFS or may require adapting your building scripts. The R14.0 branch will not be affected by these changes.
Cheers Michele
On 09/07/2018 03:39 AM, Michele Calgaro wrote:
Dear all, in the next days/weeks, Slavek and I will be doing some qt->tqt renaming in the master branch. This may affect package building and cause unwanted FTBFS or may require adapting your building scripts. The R14.0 branch will not be affected by these changes.
Cheers Michele
Michele, Tim, Slavek, All,
With KDE going to Plasma and Qt going to Frameworks, is there still any need for the Qt->tQt changes? I'm just trying to stay up to date. If we are still protecting for the possibility of a change in Qt that the tqt layer would handle, then that all makes sense, but if TDE plans to continue maintaining Qt3 (which I see no reason to change, it does everything I need), then is there still a need for the renaming effort?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On 2018/10/01 02:20 PM, David C. Rankin wrote:
On 09/07/2018 03:39 AM, Michele Calgaro wrote:
Dear all, in the next days/weeks, Slavek and I will be doing some qt->tqt renaming in the master branch. This may affect package building and cause unwanted FTBFS or may require adapting your building scripts. The R14.0 branch will not be affected by these changes.
Cheers Michele
Michele, Tim, Slavek, All,
With KDE going to Plasma and Qt going to Frameworks, is there still any need for the Qt->tQt changes? I'm just trying to stay up to date. If we are still protecting for the possibility of a change in Qt that the tqt layer would handle, then that all makes sense, but if TDE plans to continue maintaining Qt3 (which I see no reason to change, it does everything I need), then is there still a need for the renaming effort?
Hi David, the major reason for qt->tqt and kde->tde rename is avoid package conflicts in case tde is installed together with others DE. A lot of renaming has alrady been done (and a lot still has to be done), but at this stage going back is probably as much work as going forward. It feels good for TDE to have its own identity, so I see rename as a good thing. Just my two cents, others may have different views on this.
Cheers Michele
Dne po 1. října 2018 Michele Calgaro napsal(a):
On 2018/10/01 02:20 PM, David C. Rankin wrote:
On 09/07/2018 03:39 AM, Michele Calgaro wrote:
Dear all, in the next days/weeks, Slavek and I will be doing some qt->tqt renaming in the master branch. This may affect package building and cause unwanted FTBFS or may require adapting your building scripts. The R14.0 branch will not be affected by these changes.
Cheers Michele
Michele, Tim, Slavek, All,
With KDE going to Plasma and Qt going to Frameworks, is there still any need for the Qt->tQt changes? I'm just trying to stay up to date. If we are still protecting for the possibility of a change in Qt that the tqt layer would handle, then that all makes sense, but if TDE plans to continue maintaining Qt3 (which I see no reason to change, it does everything I need), then is there still a need for the renaming effort?
Hi David, the major reason for qt->tqt and kde->tde rename is avoid package conflicts in case tde is installed together with others DE. A lot of renaming has alrady been done (and a lot still has to be done), but at this stage going back is probably as much work as going forward. It feels good for TDE to have its own identity, so I see rename as a good thing. Just my two cents, others may have different views on this.
Cheers Michele
Hi David,
you should not forget one crucial thing: While for TDE v3.5.x is used Qt3 and the TQt layer was through tqtinterface, for TDE R14.x is used TQt3 with a native TQt layer and the tqtinterface is more or less transparent.
And since TQt3 is used, it makes sense not to use QT constants, but to rename them to TQT. This will not only make the code cleaner, but also prevent potential conflicts.
Cheers
Slávek Banko wrote:
you should not forget one crucial thing: While for TDE v3.5.x is used Qt3 and the TQt layer was through tqtinterface, for TDE R14.x is used TQt3 with a native TQt layer and the tqtinterface is more or less transparent.
And since TQt3 is used, it makes sense not to use QT constants, but to rename them to TQT. This will not only make the code cleaner, but also prevent potential conflicts.
You mean Q_OBJECT will become TQ_OBJECT for example?
On 10/01/2018 06:06 AM, Slávek Banko wrote:
Dne po 1. října 2018 Michele Calgaro napsal(a):
On 2018/10/01 02:20 PM, David C. Rankin wrote:
On 09/07/2018 03:39 AM, Michele Calgaro wrote:
Dear all, in the next days/weeks, Slavek and I will be doing some qt->tqt renaming in the master branch. This may affect package building and cause unwanted FTBFS or may require adapting your building scripts. The R14.0 branch will not be affected by these changes.
Cheers Michele
Michele, Tim, Slavek, All,
With KDE going to Plasma and Qt going to Frameworks, is there still any need for the Qt->tQt changes? I'm just trying to stay up to date. If we are still protecting for the possibility of a change in Qt that the tqt layer would handle, then that all makes sense, but if TDE plans to continue maintaining Qt3 (which I see no reason to change, it does everything I need), then is there still a need for the renaming effort?
Hi David, the major reason for qt->tqt and kde->tde rename is avoid package conflicts in case tde is installed together with others DE. A lot of renaming has alrady been done (and a lot still has to be done), but at this stage going back is probably as much work as going forward. It feels good for TDE to have its own identity, so I see rename as a good thing. Just my two cents, others may have different views on this.
Cheers Michele
Hi David,
you should not forget one crucial thing: While for TDE v3.5.x is used Qt3 and the TQt layer was through tqtinterface, for TDE R14.x is used TQt3 with a native TQt layer and the tqtinterface is more or less transparent.
And since TQt3 is used, it makes sense not to use QT constants, but to rename them to TQT. This will not only make the code cleaner, but also prevent potential conflicts.
Cheers
Thanks Slavek, Michele,
Yes, I remember well and I recall all the good effort you put into the initial renaming while we bridged with 3.5.13_SRU waiting for renaming, Darrel to finish tidying up the help system and the artwork for the all publicly visible material (I still have some of the original gimp and inkscape files from the time). The only reason I posed the question, was I recall you had all but eliminated any KDE3/KDE4/TDE Qt naming issues back then, and I also recall all the effort that went into the tool to help port kde/qt sources to tde/tqt so if somebody wanted to build their favorite kde app on tde, it could be done without a whole lot of grief.
I'm all for it if it is needed, but I didn't think Plasma/Frameworks5 would conflict with the Qt naming from Qt3, and with kde.org tossing kde4 on the trash heap of desktops that were going to be better than KDE3/TDE and change the world, I was just curious if it justified all the manhours to do.
If it will make everything cleaner, then it is a good thing. If it will just make it that much harder to build kde apps on tde -- well, if the conflict isn't the driver, is it worth the effort?
I may be thinking wrong, but I recall the year+ long effort to rename and rework and eliminate all conflicts in the 2012-2014 timeframe, and that was a whole lot of work. When Michele says "probably as much work as going forward", that worries me.
You guys (and girls) know best, and the past efforts work seamlessly, so if it will make things easier/cleaner, no reason not to do it.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
Thanks Slavek, Michele,
Yes, I remember well and I recall all the good effort you put into the initial renaming while we bridged with 3.5.13_SRU waiting for renaming, Darrel to finish tidying up the help system and the artwork for the all publicly visible material (I still have some of the original gimp and inkscape files from the time). The only reason I posed the question, was I recall you had all but eliminated any KDE3/KDE4/TDE Qt naming issues back then, and I also recall all the effort that went into the tool to help port kde/qt sources to tde/tqt so if somebody wanted to build their favorite kde app on tde, it could be done without a whole lot of grief.
I'm all for it if it is needed, but I didn't think Plasma/Frameworks5 would conflict with the Qt naming from Qt3, and with kde.org tossing kde4 on the trash heap of desktops that were going to be better than KDE3/TDE and change the world, I was just curious if it justified all the manhours to do.
If it will make everything cleaner, then it is a good thing. If it will just make it that much harder to build kde apps on tde -- well, if the conflict isn't the driver, is it worth the effort?
I may be thinking wrong, but I recall the year+ long effort to rename and rework and eliminate all conflicts in the 2012-2014 timeframe, and that was a whole lot of work. When Michele says "probably as much work as going forward", that worries me.
You guys (and girls) know best, and the past efforts work seamlessly, so if it will make things easier/cleaner, no reason not to do it.
Hi David, the main point is quite simple: the renaming done back in 2012-2014 is far from being complete. If we want (at some point) move TDE back to /usr, a lot still remains to be done. The code is now in a somehow messy state where some qt has been renamed tqt and some kde in tde, but many other things haven't. In addition to this, tdebindings are pretty much broken (see bug 266) and to be fixed require those libs to be moved back to /usr as well. The qt->tqt and kde->tde rename effort will take a lot of time, but we are taking it step by step: we do some renaming, then check whether everything can still build and if not, fix it. In the meantime we will keep working on bugs and improvements as we have done so far. You should think of the renaming effort as a long term task, it will not take a week, nor a month :-)
Cheers Michele
-
David C. Rankin -
deloptes -
Michele Calgaro -
Slávek Banko