Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 26th Oct 2010 15:20 UTC, submitted by diegocg
Qt Recently a project called 'Qt Modularization' was initiated. This is a project that aims to modularize Qt at every level. As you may know already, Qt is currently modularized on the DLL level; each module has its own DLL. However, the project as a whole is still monolithic; all the code is hosted in a single repository, you cannot build a leaf module without building the modules on which it depends. This project aims to change that, so that the modules are hosted in different repositories, with separate maintainers, and modules may have different release schedules.
Thread beginning with comment 447253
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Oh, for the love of god, please don't!!!!
by phoenix on Tue 26th Oct 2010 22:12 UTC
phoenix
Member since:
2005-07-11

Everytime a big monolithic project breaks up into "separate developed, separately packaged, separately released" modules, everything suffers.

Just look at the mess that is Xorg since they've split into sd/sp/sr modules. Versions are all over the place, not everything is updated to the new APIs/features, not everything works well together, and we're still waiting for everything to catch up.

Or look at the mess that is your typical Linux distribution, where upgrading 1 piece ends up upgrading half the distro, and things still break all over the place.

The nice thing about a monolithic development model is that you know for a fact that all the pieces in a release will be same for everyone who installs it, and that everything works together, all using the same features. And you aren't stuck waiting for module-foo-x.y.z to be released using feature bar-a.b.c before you can run application-Q (which is where a lot of people are when it comes to Xorg).

Reply Score: 4

Icaria Member since:
2010-06-19

Just look at the mess that is Xorg since they've split into sd/sp/sr modules. Versions are all over the place, not everything is updated to the new APIs/features, not everything works well together, and we're still waiting for everything to catch up.
Rose-tinted glasses much? X.org has brought a rapidity to development that xfree86 never saw. The current problems with X have little to do with modularisation but mostly with trying to fix all the bugs created by the move to DRI2 and by moving half the server to the kernel, while also the same-old problem of trying to get recent video hardware to run on an open stack.

Or look at the mess that is your typical Linux distribution, where upgrading 1 piece ends up upgrading half the distro, and things still break all over the place.
So what, you're just blatantly full of shit? Okay, carry on.

The nice thing about a monolithic development model is that you know for a fact that all the pieces in a release will be same for everyone who installs it, and that everything works together, all using the same features. And you aren't stuck waiting for module-foo-x.y.z to be released using feature bar-a.b.c before you can run application-Q (which is where a lot of people are when it comes to Xorg).
Except most people aren't building X modules from git devel. X.org has discreet releases but even if they didn't, distributions would still take care to ensure that their ddx/dri/server/etc combinations were sound.

Reply Parent Score: 7

phreck Member since:
2009-08-13

Thanks to my typical linux installation upgrading non-monolithicly I end up saving tons of bandwidth, hence megatons of times. And because I save time, my linux box, as a bonus, is more safe on average.

What are the alternatives?
* mega 5GiB update every two months
* update only major apps
* never update

Btw, upgrading half-the-distro on a typical linux installtion typically only happens when upgrading the-whole-distro.

Reply Parent Score: 2