On Thursday, 1 de December de 2011 02.39.23, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Yes, I understand the need to have the tools compiled for the host
> architecture when cross compiling, but I don't understand why that was
> brought up in the context of moving the source code for the tools to a
> different repo.
Hello all,
I am currently cleaning up Qt5 modules so they all compile using the
-qtnamespace option in configure. I have completed some of the modules without
incident but would like feedback on my current plan of action for modules that
deviate from the standard naming convention.
So for the
On Thursday, December 01, 2011 01:58:31 you wrote:
> On Thursday 01 December 2011 01:16:53 Stephen Kelly wrote:
> > On Wednesday, November 30, 2011 11:01:32 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, 30 de November de 2011 19.01.53, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > > > > For now I'm interested in floa
On Thursday 01 December 2011 01:16:53 Stephen Kelly wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 30, 2011 11:01:32 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 30 de November de 2011 19.01.53, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > > > For now I'm interested in floating the general idea of putting
> > > > build-time- tools
2011/11/29 Thiago Macieira :
> On Friday, 25 de November de 2011 08.30.56, lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote:
>> My proposal would be to simplify this setup and start relying on ICU for
>> many of the tasks. We would still expose things through a Qt API though.
>> It would simplify the maintenance of our
On Wednesday, November 30, 2011 11:01:32 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Wednesday, 30 de November de 2011 19.01.53, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > > For now I'm interested in floating the general idea of putting
> > > build-time- tools into qtbase.git instead of qttools.git.
> >
> > Sounds reasonable
On Wednesday, 30 de November de 2011 21.04.11, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> i don't want that. lrelease is bootstrapped since 4.6 or so, and it
> sucks (no codec support, for example). also, the code sharing between
> the linguist app and tools would add some logistical hassle when tearing
> apart t
On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 12:20:27PM +0100, ext Stephen Kelly wrote:
> > If I want to use the QtDBus module, I want to be able to use the tools to
> > generate xml and c++ interfaces for dbus.
>
> that's reasonable.
>
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2011
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 12:20:27PM +0100, ext Stephen Kelly wrote:
> If I want to use the QtDBus module, I want to be able to use the tools to
> generate xml and c++ interfaces for dbus.
>
that's reasonable.
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 11:01:32AM -0800, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> I don't know, ho
2011/11/30 :
> Hi
>
> During the contributors summit at Dev Days in San Fran doc was discussed -
> in few different contexts, including getting folks to contribute to it.
>
> What about the approach used by some projects of having the canonically
> hosted documentation provide for a forum post sty
On Wednesday, 30 de November de 2011 19.01.53, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > For now I'm interested in floating the general idea of putting build-time-
> > tools into qtbase.git instead of qttools.git.
>
> Sounds reasonable IMO.
Agreed.
HarryF has done some work for the Fremantle port of Qt to ma
On Wednesday, November 30, 2011 17:57:02 sarah.j.sm...@nokia.com wrote:
> Hi
>
> During the contributors summit at Dev Days in San Fran doc was discussed -
> in few different contexts, including getting folks to contribute to it.
>
> What about the approach used by some projects of having the can
On Wednesday 30 November 2011, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Currently lupdate, lrelease, qdbusxml2cpp and qdbuscpp2xml are not in the
> qtbase repo, they are in qttools instead, along with designer, qdbusviewer,
> linguist etc.
>
> I don't think qttools is the right place for those build-time-u
Hi
During the contributors summit at Dev Days in San Fran doc was discussed - in
few different contexts, including getting folks to contribute to it.
What about the approach used by some projects of having the canonically hosted
documentation provide for a forum post style comment feature down
During the Lighthouse documentation discussion here in San Francisco, one of
the topics raised was where classes like QX11EmbedContainer and
QMacCocoaViewContainer would be. They cannot be in QtGui because QtGui does
not link to the necessary libraries.
So our conclusion is that we need a set of l
Hi,
Currently lupdate, lrelease, qdbusxml2cpp and qdbuscpp2xml are not in the
qtbase repo, they are in qttools instead, along with designer, qdbusviewer,
linguist etc.
I don't think qttools is the right place for those build-time-useful tools.
If I want to use the QtDBus module, I want to be
16 matches
Mail list logo
