Bug#757645: Rationale for the change

[Yuri D'Elia]

On 08/18/2014 11:32 AM, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote:
>> You could detect at runtime which binding is available and "gray 
>> out" the selection if you really wanted to. This would fix the 
>> issue "permanently".
> 
> this needs code, and would be nice to have a patch, or to report 
> upstream :)

Yes, this is why it's probably like this anyway. Not worth the effort.

> but my approach will avoid the extra documentation if not needed, 
> someone talked about small systems ;)

No problem with that. It's always good to have more granularity.

Though generally speaking, you'd need examples for doing development.

>> I feel that a reccomends would be too strong anyway, as one of the 
>> goals of pyqtgraph is really to be interchangeable between the
>> two. As far as an example is concerned, if it runs with the
>> installed engine, what's the point really?
> 
> the point is that people like me wants to have stuff working without 
> reading the READMEs, trying to search for the right dependencies, 
> look at recommends/depends/suggests fields...

I think this discussion is a bit overkill.

I mean, you need pyqtgraph for development.
pyqtgraph needs at least *one* qt binding to work at all.
As a developer, I don't need strict dependencies to understand that.
In fact, I'm forced to use pyqt in some projects, and pyside in others.

When pyqtgraph is pulled as a dependency, you need to make sure to pull
the least amount of dependencies for user's sake. This is why an OR
dependency is the way to go. I would revert dependencies just to fix this.

I'm being pragmatic here. I'd expect developers to know what pyqt or
pyside mean. Maybe they don't know which one to choose, but this doesn't
make an intrinsic difference.