> On June 2, 2014, 1:02 p.m., Vishesh Handa wrote: > > Considering that QtTest is part of qtbase, does this really have much of an > > advantage?
That's true, however some distributions split qtbase into its various parts. - Michael ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118466/#review58959 ----------------------------------------------------------- On June 2, 2014, 11:03 a.m., Michael Palimaka wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118466/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated June 2, 2014, 11:03 a.m.) > > > Review request for Baloo. > > > Repository: baloo > > > Description > ------- > > While a good idea to have, QtTest is not strictly necessary. This uses the > same approach as in kwin to make this optional. > > > Diffs > ----- > > CMakeLists.txt fe6b24195eb39d9113004169bf119f4fe991e32b > > Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118466/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Builds and tests/not tests as expected. All tests conducted with > KDEPIM_SUPPORT_BUILD off. > > > Thanks, > > Michael Palimaka > >
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
