7 Sep
2018
7 Sep
'18
8:39 a.m.
-----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
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=qi5j
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
1 Oct
1 Oct
6:20 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] QT->TQT changes in main trunk
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?
--
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
9:31 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] QT->TQT changes in main trunk
-----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:
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
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 SIGNATURE-----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=0TDQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
11:06 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] QT->TQT changes in main trunk
Dne po 1. října 2018 Michele Calgaro napsal(a):
On 2018/10/01 02:20 PM, David C. Rankin wrote:
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
On 09/07/2018 03:39 AM, Michele Calgaro wrote:
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
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? 
6:05 p.m.
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?
8 Oct
8 Oct
8:09 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] QT->TQT changes in main trunk
On 10/01/2018 06:06 AM, Slávek Banko wrote:
Dne po 1. října 2018 Michele Calgaro napsal(a):
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.
--
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
On 2018/10/01 02:20 PM, David C. Rankin wrote:
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
On 09/07/2018 03:39 AM, Michele Calgaro wrote:
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
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?
11:21 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] QT->TQT changes in main trunk
-----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
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=2O5g
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
2027
days inactive
2058
days old
6 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
David C. Rankin -
deloptes -
Michele Calgaro -
Slávek Banko