---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:
Jacob Dawid <address@hidden>
Date: 2011/4/11
Subject: Re: Successfully merged projects
To: "John W. Eaton" <
address@hidden>
wysota in the QtCentre forums says this:
Let's face it - cmake is a next generation tool compared to qmake just
as qmake is a next generation tool compared to autotools or tmake. So
this is obvious that many things are easier to obtain with cmake than
with qmake because the former learned from the experience gathered by
the latter. But this all doesn't change a fact that if you want to
deploy a Qt based application in a foreign environment it is easier to
do it using qmake than using cmake once you have the build
infrastructure set up properly. So this is really a battle between
easing the development stage and easing the installation stage. From
what I've seen on QtCentre the latter yields more problems thus it is
better if one experienced developer battles with qmake than if dozens of
unexperienced Windoze end-users battle with both cmake (and its
dependencies) and the final application itself. And let's not forget Qt
needs to be deployed as well (in both cases).
So to sum things up - for Qt only applications I will prefer qmake over
cmake as long as qmake is a standard build tool for Qt. For KDE4
applications I will prefer cmake over anything else because I'm not
smart enough to setup my own build infrastructure for KDE applications.
For other uses I can use either one or the other or even write a
dedicated Makefile if neither is available.
Let's face it - cmake is a next generation tool compared to qmake just
as qmake is a next generation tool compared to autotools or tmake. So
this is obvious that many things are easier to obtain with cmake than
with qmake because the former learned from the experience gathered by
the latter. But this all doesn't change a fact that if you want to
deploy a Qt based application in a foreign environment it is easier to
do it using qmake than using cmake once you have the build
infrastructure set up properly. So this is really a battle between
easing the development stage and easing the installation stage. From
what I've seen on QtCentre the latter yields more problems thus it is
better if one experienced developer battles with qmake than if dozens of
unexperienced Windoze end-users battle with both cmake (and its
dependencies) and the final application itself. And let's not forget Qt
needs to be deployed as well (in both cases).
So to sum things up - for Qt only applications I will prefer qmake over
cmake as long as qmake is a standard build tool for Qt. For KDE4
applications I will prefer cmake over anything else because I'm not
smart enough to setup my own build infrastructure for KDE applications.
For other uses I can use either one or the other or even write a
dedicated Makefile if neither is available.