Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add qscintilla.

[Kei Kebreau <kei@openmailbox.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1535 bytes --]

Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> writes:

> On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 04:56:34PM -0400, Leo Famulari wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 04:10:15PM -0400, Kei Kebreau wrote:
>> > Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr> writes:
>> > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 04:37:35PM -0400, Kei Kebreau wrote:
>> > >> In this case, should I leave qtscintilla-qt4 as a public
>> > >> package in qt.scm
>> > >> instead of maths.scm as Leo suggested?
>> > >
>> > > since it is used for only one package and relies on the deprecated qt@4,
>> > > I would leave it private, regardless its name.
>> > 
>> > It seems that there are conflicting opinions here. :)
>> > If no one minds, I can support this feature out-of-tree until GNU Octave
>> > updates its UI to use Qt 5.
>> > 
>> > Opinions?
>> 
>> I don't think we need to keep it out of tree.
>> 
>> I agree with Andreas that we should discourage use of Qt 4, but I don't
>> think we should not use it at all, or else I would have suggested
>> removing all Qt 4 related software.
>> 
>> I think that if there is a reason to export the package at this time, we
>> should do so. Otherwise, I think we should keep it private. If we need
>> to export it later, we can.
>> 
>> Efraim, do you have a use for a Qt 4 variant of qscintilla?
>
> Nope.

To get this right: qscintilla will be defined publicly in qt.scm,
qscintilla-qt4 will be defined privately in maths.scm (how do I inherit
a package from another module?), and Octave will include qscintilla-qt4
and qt-4 as inputs.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 818 bytes --]