* Re: [meta-qt5][PATCH] qtbase.inc: Enable accessibility by default
2014-05-14 19:04 ` Otavio Salvador
@ 2014-05-15 8:10 ` Anders Darander
2014-05-15 9:16 ` Samuel Stirtzel
2014-05-15 11:22 ` Jonathan Liu
2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Anders Darander @ 2014-05-15 8:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-devel
* Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br> [140514 21:12]:
> On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
> > On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:27:39PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >>> qtdeclarative requires accessibility to be enabled and it is added by
> >>> default to the toolchain so we ought to have it enabled to ensure the
> >>> default toolchain generation works.
> >>> Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>
> > ...
> >> As I told you on gtalk, I would prefer default to stay as minimal as
> >> posible, why don't you change packagegroup-qt5-toolchain-target.bb to
> >> use RRECOMMENDS instead of RDEPENDS so that missing
> >> qtquickcontrols-qmlplugins package doesn't break it when it's not
> >> available (because it's empty)?
> > I don't have a strong opinion for either case however I think we ought
> > to know what other meta-qt5 users think about it.
> > In support to this patch addition I think we ought to provide the most
> > used features of Qt5 working out of box to users have a good first
> > use. Special cases can customize it per need basis. I think QML is
> > common enough for us to provide full support for it by default.
> Martin and I have different views on this topic and I'd like to merge
> or drop this patch. Could people comment on this one?
Well, I can understand your point, that it should be as easy as possible
to use the toolchain to build whatever you want...
However, in all the cases where I've been using Qt5 lately, both for
internal projects as well as for customers, we've always ended up
trying to minimize which part of Qt5 we're building. (To reduce build
time, flash usage etc).
With that in mind, I'd prefer a as minimal Qt5 and toolchain as
possible, letting me enable more things easily by using PACKAGECONFIG.
One way to reduce the rather large modification to the toolchain recipe
would likely be to have it RRECOMMEND as much as possible, and only
RDEPEND on the most basic parts of Qt5. (Though, I haven't tried that
version yet).
Cheers,
Anders
--
Anders Darander
ChargeStorm AB / eStorm AB
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-qt5][PATCH] qtbase.inc: Enable accessibility by default
2014-05-14 19:04 ` Otavio Salvador
2014-05-15 8:10 ` Anders Darander
@ 2014-05-15 9:16 ` Samuel Stirtzel
2014-05-15 10:21 ` Martin Jansa
2014-05-15 11:22 ` Jonathan Liu
2 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Samuel Stirtzel @ 2014-05-15 9:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: openembedded-devel
2014-05-14 21:04 GMT+02:00 Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>:
> Hello folks,
>
> On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
>> On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:27:39PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>>>> qtdeclarative requires accessibility to be enabled and it is added by
>>>> default to the toolchain so we ought to have it enabled to ensure the
>>>> default toolchain generation works.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>
>> ...
>>> As I told you on gtalk, I would prefer default to stay as minimal as
>>> posible, why don't you change packagegroup-qt5-toolchain-target.bb to
>>> use RRECOMMENDS instead of RDEPENDS so that missing
>>> qtquickcontrols-qmlplugins package doesn't break it when it's not
>>> available (because it's empty)?
>>
>> I don't have a strong opinion for either case however I think we ought
>> to know what other meta-qt5 users think about it.
>>
>> In support to this patch addition I think we ought to provide the most
>> used features of Qt5 working out of box to users have a good first
>> use. Special cases can customize it per need basis. I think QML is
>> common enough for us to provide full support for it by default.
>
>
> Martin and I have different views on this topic and I'd like to merge
> or drop this patch. Could people comment on this one?
>
We may want to be able to let the user choose between 2 flavors of Qt.
One of them could be a standard Qt (which is what I use), other users
seem to prefer a stripped down version with some features switched
off.
As 'Giuseppe D'Angelo <giuseppe.dangelo@kdab.com>' noted on qt-interest [1]:
"Apart from this: builds with feature switches are not really tested,
so I'm not surprised that [there are combinations that don't even
build]. But we totally welcome patches that would fix such builds."
So IMO it would be a good idea to have a constantly tested low
footprint version.
There is no one size fits all in this case, but can we provide 2
versions that work for 99% of the users?
[1] http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/interest/2014-May/012237.html
--
Regards
Samuel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-qt5][PATCH] qtbase.inc: Enable accessibility by default
2014-05-15 9:16 ` Samuel Stirtzel
@ 2014-05-15 10:21 ` Martin Jansa
2014-05-15 11:34 ` Samuel Stirtzel
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Martin Jansa @ 2014-05-15 10:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Samuel Stirtzel; +Cc: openembedded-devel
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2680 bytes --]
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:16:00AM +0200, Samuel Stirtzel wrote:
> 2014-05-14 21:04 GMT+02:00 Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>:
> > Hello folks,
> >
> > On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
> >> On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:27:39PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> >>>> qtdeclarative requires accessibility to be enabled and it is added by
> >>>> default to the toolchain so we ought to have it enabled to ensure the
> >>>> default toolchain generation works.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>
> >> ...
> >>> As I told you on gtalk, I would prefer default to stay as minimal as
> >>> posible, why don't you change packagegroup-qt5-toolchain-target.bb to
> >>> use RRECOMMENDS instead of RDEPENDS so that missing
> >>> qtquickcontrols-qmlplugins package doesn't break it when it's not
> >>> available (because it's empty)?
> >>
> >> I don't have a strong opinion for either case however I think we ought
> >> to know what other meta-qt5 users think about it.
> >>
> >> In support to this patch addition I think we ought to provide the most
> >> used features of Qt5 working out of box to users have a good first
> >> use. Special cases can customize it per need basis. I think QML is
> >> common enough for us to provide full support for it by default.
> >
> >
> > Martin and I have different views on this topic and I'd like to merge
> > or drop this patch. Could people comment on this one?
> >
>
>
> We may want to be able to let the user choose between 2 flavors of Qt.
>
> One of them could be a standard Qt (which is what I use), other users
> seem to prefer a stripped down version with some features switched
> off.
>
> As 'Giuseppe D'Angelo <giuseppe.dangelo@kdab.com>' noted on qt-interest [1]:
> "Apart from this: builds with feature switches are not really tested,
> so I'm not surprised that [there are combinations that don't even
> build]. But we totally welcome patches that would fix such builds."
>
> So IMO it would be a good idea to have a constantly tested low
> footprint version.
>
> There is no one size fits all in this case, but can we provide 2
> versions that work for 99% of the users?
What you mean by 2 versions here?
There is simple PACKAGECONFIG option to enable more features (most
people will probably enable icu, gl* and accessibility).
But we don't want 2 qtbase recipes one with more PACKAGECONFIG options
enabled and other with more disabled.
--
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-qt5][PATCH] qtbase.inc: Enable accessibility by default
2014-05-15 10:21 ` Martin Jansa
@ 2014-05-15 11:34 ` Samuel Stirtzel
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Samuel Stirtzel @ 2014-05-15 11:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Martin Jansa; +Cc: openembedded-devel
2014-05-15 12:21 GMT+02:00 Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>:
> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:16:00AM +0200, Samuel Stirtzel wrote:
>> 2014-05-14 21:04 GMT+02:00 Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>:
>> > Hello folks,
>> >
>> > On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
>> >> On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:27:39PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> >>>> qtdeclarative requires accessibility to be enabled and it is added by
>> >>>> default to the toolchain so we ought to have it enabled to ensure the
>> >>>> default toolchain generation works.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>
>> >> ...
>> >>> As I told you on gtalk, I would prefer default to stay as minimal as
>> >>> posible, why don't you change packagegroup-qt5-toolchain-target.bb to
>> >>> use RRECOMMENDS instead of RDEPENDS so that missing
>> >>> qtquickcontrols-qmlplugins package doesn't break it when it's not
>> >>> available (because it's empty)?
>> >>
>> >> I don't have a strong opinion for either case however I think we ought
>> >> to know what other meta-qt5 users think about it.
>> >>
>> >> In support to this patch addition I think we ought to provide the most
>> >> used features of Qt5 working out of box to users have a good first
>> >> use. Special cases can customize it per need basis. I think QML is
>> >> common enough for us to provide full support for it by default.
>> >
>> >
>> > Martin and I have different views on this topic and I'd like to merge
>> > or drop this patch. Could people comment on this one?
>> >
>>
>>
>> We may want to be able to let the user choose between 2 flavors of Qt.
>>
>> One of them could be a standard Qt (which is what I use), other users
>> seem to prefer a stripped down version with some features switched
>> off.
>>
>> As 'Giuseppe D'Angelo <giuseppe.dangelo@kdab.com>' noted on qt-interest [1]:
>> "Apart from this: builds with feature switches are not really tested,
>> so I'm not surprised that [there are combinations that don't even
>> build]. But we totally welcome patches that would fix such builds."
>>
>> So IMO it would be a good idea to have a constantly tested low
>> footprint version.
>>
>> There is no one size fits all in this case, but can we provide 2
>> versions that work for 99% of the users?
>
> What you mean by 2 versions here?
>
> There is simple PACKAGECONFIG option to enable more features (most
> people will probably enable icu, gl* and accessibility).
With 2 versions it is meant that the user has a simple way to select
one of two well tested sets of configurations without knowing the
details/pitfalls of all the configuration entries.
>
> But we don't want 2 qtbase recipes one with more PACKAGECONFIG options
> enabled and other with more disabled.
>
Agreed. Multiple qtbase recipes are a suboptimal solution.
A DISTRO_FEATURES entry could do; although other implementations could
be more suitable.
In cases where a user wants more fine grained control over the
packages, he can still override the PACKAGECONFIG in a .bbappend.
--
Regards
Samuel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [meta-qt5][PATCH] qtbase.inc: Enable accessibility by default
2014-05-14 19:04 ` Otavio Salvador
2014-05-15 8:10 ` Anders Darander
2014-05-15 9:16 ` Samuel Stirtzel
@ 2014-05-15 11:22 ` Jonathan Liu
2 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jonathan Liu @ 2014-05-15 11:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Otavio Salvador, Martin Jansa; +Cc: OpenEmbedded Devel List
On 15/05/2014 5:04 AM, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Hello folks,
>
> On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
>> On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:27:39PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>>>> qtdeclarative requires accessibility to be enabled and it is added by
>>>> default to the toolchain so we ought to have it enabled to ensure the
>>>> default toolchain generation works.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br>
>> ...
>>> As I told you on gtalk, I would prefer default to stay as minimal as
>>> posible, why don't you change packagegroup-qt5-toolchain-target.bb to
>>> use RRECOMMENDS instead of RDEPENDS so that missing
>>> qtquickcontrols-qmlplugins package doesn't break it when it's not
>>> available (because it's empty)?
>> I don't have a strong opinion for either case however I think we ought
>> to know what other meta-qt5 users think about it.
>>
>> In support to this patch addition I think we ought to provide the most
>> used features of Qt5 working out of box to users have a good first
>> use. Special cases can customize it per need basis. I think QML is
>> common enough for us to provide full support for it by default.
>
> Martin and I have different views on this topic and I'd like to merge
> or drop this patch. Could people comment on this one?
>
If changing to RRECOMMENDS resolves the issue I vote for that option.
It's better to start minimal and add only what you need when creating an
image.
Regards,
Jonathan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread