On Wednesday, 16 de November de 2011 15.45.11, Peter Hartmann wrote:
> >> I am not sure what you mean by invite-only. Could you please
> >> ellaborate on the precise meaning ?
> >
> > A member propose to invite a person, and modulo approval of the others
> > he/she can join.
>
> exactly, just lik
Op 16-11-2011 18:56, David Faure schreef:
> On Wednesday 16 November 2011 18:26:25 Andre Somers wrote:
>> Op 16-11-2011 18:13, David Faure schreef:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> As previously discussed on qt5-feedback, I wrote QTemporaryDir and
>>> submitted it to gerrit at http://codereview.qt-project.org/#c
On Wednesday 16 November 2011 18:26:25 Andre Somers wrote:
> Op 16-11-2011 18:13, David Faure schreef:
> > Hello,
> >
> > As previously discussed on qt5-feedback, I wrote QTemporaryDir and
> > submitted it to gerrit at http://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,8297
> > After a few reviews from Thia
On Wednesday 16 November 2011 18:22:23 Harri Porten wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2011, David Faure wrote:
> > Thiago suggested that I post the header file here, to see if anyone had
> > feedback on the (rather short) API.
> >
> > Actually I'll post the .cpp file too, since the documentation of the API
Op 16-11-2011 18:13, David Faure schreef:
> Hello,
>
> As previously discussed on qt5-feedback, I wrote QTemporaryDir and submitted
> it to gerrit at http://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,8297
> After a few reviews from Thiago (and redoing the implementation on Windows)
> it's now ready for subm
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011, David Faure wrote:
> Thiago suggested that I post the header file here, to see if anyone had
> feedback on the (rather short) API.
>
> Actually I'll post the .cpp file too, since the documentation of the API is
> there :)
I tried without the documentation. Feedback based on
Hello,
As previously discussed on qt5-feedback, I wrote QTemporaryDir and submitted
it to gerrit at http://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,8297
After a few reviews from Thiago (and redoing the implementation on Windows)
it's now ready for submission. Thiago suggested that I post the header file
Am 02.11.2011 11:14, schrieb Olivier Goffart:
> But am I alone to think that 3 weeks of waiting time is a lot?
> 15 work day is a lot, how about reducing it to something between 7 and 10
> work days?
OTOH, is this really a time-critical process? In doubt I would choose
the longer option, not t
On 11/11/11 7:24 AM, "ext Giuseppe D'Angelo" wrote:
>On 11 November 2011 12:32, Robin Burchell wrote:
>> hi,
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 1:10 PM, wrote:
>>> Our main issue seem to be timing then. We currently have the
>>>opportunity
>>> of changing API to some extend before we freeze down th
I'll chime in with a +1 from me as well.
Looks good.
--
.marius
On 11/2/11 5:55 AM, "ext lars.kn...@nokia.com"
wrote:
>+1 from me :)
>
>Cheers,
>Lars
>
>On 11/1/11 5:00 PM, "Peter Hartmann" wrote:
>
>>Hello,
>>
>>hereby I would like to propose Richard Moore as approver for the Qt
>>project.
>
On 11/4/11 10:53 AM, "ext Oswald Buddenhagen"
wrote:
>On 11/04/11 14:29, ext Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote:
>> I want to use file:*directfb*, but according to this[1] I will need to
>>watch
>> the project,
>correct. the search function generally sucks.
>
>> so I started to watch qt/qtbase with
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:44 AM, wrote:
> On 11/14/11 5:13 PM, "ext Oswald Buddenhagen"
> wrote:
>
>>moin,
>>
>>due to about a dozen bugs, a few of them fairly serious, i went ahead
>>and disabled the topic review functionality. it will come back, but not
>>necessarily this year. :}
>
> Have yo
On 11/10/11 2:00 AM, "ext bradley.hug...@nokia.com"
wrote:
>On 10 Nov, 2011, at 00:41 , ext Rick Stockton wrote:
>> Should we do them all as one update, or do xlib first -- and add the
>>more widely used xcb as a separate update, after the first one is found
>>NOT to cause regression test failure
On 11/14/11 5:13 PM, "ext Oswald Buddenhagen"
wrote:
>moin,
>
>due to about a dozen bugs, a few of them fairly serious, i went ahead
>and disabled the topic review functionality. it will come back, but not
>necessarily this year. :}
Have you made a note of those "dozen bugs" on the wiki, so we c
On 11/16/2011 03:30 PM, ext Alexis Menard wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Laszlo Papp wrote:
>>> We are planning to transfer that list to something @qt-project.org.The
>>> plan is to make that list invite-only and the archives private.
>>
>> I am not sure what you mean by invite-only. C
We are happy to tell you that we have published the Qt Creator 2.4.0 release
candidate today:
http://labs.qt.nokia.com/2011/11/16/qt-creator-2-4-0-rc-released/
http://developer.qt.nokia.com/wiki/Qt_Creator_Releases
https://qt.gitorious.org/qt-creator/qt-creator/commits/v2.4.0-rc
Happy hacking!
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Laszlo Papp wrote:
>> We are planning to transfer that list to something @qt-project.org.The
>> plan is to make that list invite-only and the archives private.
>
> I am not sure what you mean by invite-only. Could you please
> ellaborate on the precise meaning ?
> We are planning to transfer that list to something @qt-project.org.The
> plan is to make that list invite-only and the archives private.
I am not sure what you mean by invite-only. Could you please
ellaborate on the precise meaning ?
In general, I think it would be nice to provide the opportuni
On 11/16/11 11:32 AM, "Peter Hartmann" wrote:
>On 11/15/2011 09:30 PM, ext lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote:
>> (...)
>> The reason why many other projects have private lists for security
>>issues
>> is to avoid making zero day exploits widely known. It would most likely
>>be
>> good to also be able to
On 11/15/2011 09:30 PM, ext lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote:
> (...)
> The reason why many other projects have private lists for security issues
> is to avoid making zero day exploits widely known. It would most likely be
> good to also be able to discuss some of these issues in a more closed
> mailing
20 matches
Mail list logo
