On 13/05/14 08:57, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macie...@intel.com> wrote:
>Em ter 13 maio 2014, às 06:01:00, Knoll Lars escreveu: >> Actually I was thinking about splitting a few more things out. In >>addition >> to the ones mentioned above, I believe we would benefit from splitting >> QtNetwork out into it’s own module. The reason is that QtNetwork is >> responsible for many of the failing CI runs due to the inherent >> instability on the network tests. Splitting out the module should help >> make many of the qtbase integrations go more smoothly. >> >> From what I can see nothing else in qtbase (apart from the bearer >>plugins) >> depends on qtnetwork, so a split should be possible. > >That won't help unless we also disable the revdep for QtQuick, as QtQuick >depends on QtNetwork. That doesn’t mean we need to run the network tests as a revdep as well. >We definitely need the QtNetwork tests rerun every time a change in >QIODevice >is made (3 of the 6 classes deriving from it are in QtNetwork), but that >could >be managed. I don’t see that as a big problem. How often do we change QIODevice in practice? It’s a couple of times per year. Cheers, Lars _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
