https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979124 --- Comment #60 from Jake Petroules <jake.petroules@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- >>> Would anybody mind if I would simply leave the files: DarwinGCC.qbs,darwin-tools.js,ios-gcc.qbs,msvc.js,osx-gcc.qbs in the package? I fear that maintaining this list of files will be hard and error prune. Also they are part of qbs. So what tells me that I am not breaking the package for some people who include them (maybe for targets on other operating systems)? Well, I brought up the same point earlier. ;) I think it's find to leave them as part of the cpp subpackage and it eases our worries upstream about something being left out. >>> @WiX - Module: Hm... That looks like a lot of work to keep this tested and maintained. There currently is no easy way to install it on fedora it seems. So I would prefer not to put that much effort into it (and each release again to test it) especially since it does not seem to be officially supported for linux. As a package maintainer, that's not really your responsibility. That's my responsibility as an upstream developer. You can just mark it "unsupported" and not actually add any package dependency for it... but I want to be able to use it if I feel like it. Since I'll likely remove the `condition: qbs.hostOS.contains("windows")` you technically *can't* remove it at that point because it could break user code. >>> @Kevin: Well that is for the people who only think of it as qmake replacement. But in fact it grows to be more than that. Correct. You could also think of it as a replacement for CMake that just happens to be implemented in Qt and that Qt just happens to plan to adopt. There's no relation to qmake other than it being developed by roughly the same group of people. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review