https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979124 --- Comment #61 from Kevin Kofler <kevin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- > 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. We have a policy in Fedora of not shipping packages that are useless without a third-party dependency: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packages_which_are_not_useful_without_external_bits (A way around this would be to ship the WiX support in the main qbs package, or together with NSIS support, because then the resulting package is not unusable without a third-party dependency.) But IMHO, not only we shouldn't be shipping WiX support at all, but YOU as upstream shouldn't be, either. People should use NSIS instead. WiX is a typical example of "Free, but shackled". > 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. There surely are ways for us around that (e.g. shipping a dummy WiX support that errors when people actually want to run WiX, which wouldn't work anyway). > 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. I still doubt that QBS is realistically going to be picked up outside of the Qt community. -- 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