Re: [Development] Qt 5 and old versions of XCB

On 18/03/2012, at 5:46 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote: I asked about xcb on the LSB mailing list and early responses suggest that although xcb has been mentioned there before, it doesn't sound like it's progressed much beyond that. Dropping support for xlib and relying on xcb would thus make Qt5 a non

Re: [Development] [Releasing] Qt 4.8.1 release during week 11/2012

Hi Tuuka, Following this up - did your release team members get access to branch and tag? Thanks, Girish 2012/3/16 Turunen Tuukka : > Excellent, thank you very much for the trust. > > > We naturally want to have all release content from the Qt Project. If some > patch is needed, it is done via ge

[Development] Why Qt5 master don't generate pch docs?

Hi, I am not sure it is or not is a bug? But after build Qt5 master, I fond in docs folder, not have any pch files? Any comments? -- Regards Loaden ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/deve

[Development] Three issue about Qt5 alpha

*Issue 1:* Wrong behaviour when parse qt.conf See https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-24839 *Issue 2* (I am not sure this is or not?): After build in Qt source, I choice install qt to other place, e.g. Qt Source Dir = D:\Qt5 Qt Install Root = D:\Dev\Qt5 Use command: > nmake install INS

Re: [Development] will Qt 5 alpha version be released today?

Hi, 2012/3/19 hailong geng : > Hi >     I remembered that Qt 5 alpha version would be released on March 20th? >     I am eager for that and just want to check it out whether this will come > true ^_^ > Unfortunately, no. The date has been moved to this friday or next monday depending on when it's

[Development] will Qt 5 alpha version be released today?

Hi     I remembered that Qt 5 alpha version would be released on March 20th?     I am eager for that and just want to check it out whether this will come true ^_^___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/

Re: [Development] Removal of xlib plugin - a possible disaster.

On segunda-feira, 19 de março de 2012 21.29.12, Shawn Rutledge wrote: > 2012/3/18 Thiago Macieira : > > so users can test. So far, in my testing, I have found that Qt Creator > > compiles and runs, with Qt Quick parts (I don't know if 1 or 2) show fine, > > but the QWidget backgrounds show black (m

Re: [Development] Removal of xlib plugin - a possible disaster.

2012/3/18 Thiago Macieira : > so users can test. So far, in my testing, I have found that Qt Creator > compiles and runs, with Qt Quick parts (I don't know if 1 or 2) show fine, but > the QWidget backgrounds show black (menus, tree views, etc.). That started happening sometime between 17 Feb. and

Re: [Development] The qtbase CI should run the qtdeclarative tests

On Mar 19, 2012, at 8:01 PM, ext kent.han...@nokia.com wrote: > (Top-posting from webmail) > Yes, we should try to add tests to qtbase when a bug is caught by a > qtdeclarative test, just like we add tests for any other bug fix. > > http://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,19582 broke qquicktex

Re: [Development] The qtbase CI should run the qtdeclarative tests

> For http://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,19591 I requested at test, > but apparently there's some IPv4 vs 6 special configuration needed for > it to make sense. I don't know why the test can't be in qtbase; the > TestHTTPServer that was crashing in qtdeclarative is running on the > local host

[Development] qtbase/api_changes will be merged as soon as the Qt5 alpha ships

Hi, The qtbase/api_changes branch will be merged into master as soon as the Qt5 alpha SHA1 has been decided (should be before the end of the week). Once api_changes has been merged, the ship for adding new features to Qt5.0 has definitely sailed ... unless you've made some special pact with Lars

Re: [Development] C++ Now!

On Monday 19 March 2012 19:59:38 Cristian Adam wrote: > Hi, > > No Qt talk at C++ now ? It looks like the most > important C++ conference > and Qt is missing from the schedule . > > I mean, Visual Studio >

Re: [Development] The qtbase CI should run the qtdeclarative tests

(Top-posting from webmail) Yes, we should try to add tests to qtbase when a bug is caught by a qtdeclarative test, just like we add tests for any other bug fix. http://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,19582 broke qquicktextinput. http://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,20286 fixed it, but no n

[Development] C++ Now!

Hi, No Qt talk at C++ now ? It looks like the most important C++ conference and Qt is missing from the schedule . I mean, Visual Studio will be there, why not Qt & QtCreator? Qt5 and QtCre

Re: [Development] qHash / QHash changes

Hi all, thanks everybody for your feedback! 2012/3/19 Thiago Macieira : > On segunda-feira, 19 de março de 2012 10.42.44, Thiago Macieira wrote: >> [1] note that the order is stable. Two hashing tables with the same >> elements  must produce the same order. > > Actually, thinking a little more ab

Re: [Development] The qtbase CI should run the qtdeclarative tests

On 03/19/2012 03:18 PM, ext Thiago Macieira wrote: > On segunda-feira, 19 de março de 2012 14.28.35, Kent Hansen wrote: >> Den 19. mars 2012 10:32, skrev ext Thiago Macieira: >>> On segunda-feira, 19 de março de 2012 08.01.41, lars.kn...@nokia.com > wrote: > Yes, in some ways I feel this is add

Re: [Development] The qtbase CI should run the qtdeclarative tests

On segunda-feira, 19 de março de 2012 14.28.35, Kent Hansen wrote: > Den 19. mars 2012 10:32, skrev ext Thiago Macieira: > > On segunda-feira, 19 de março de 2012 08.01.41, lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote: > >>> Yes, in some ways I feel this is adding complexity to the test setup to > >>> work around a

Re: [Development] The qtbase CI should run the qtdeclarative tests

Den 19. mars 2012 10:32, skrev ext Thiago Macieira: > On segunda-feira, 19 de março de 2012 08.01.41, lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote: >>> Yes, in some ways I feel this is adding complexity to the test setup to >>> work around a "false simplicity" in our source code setup. We claim >>> that Qt is modul

Re: [Development] These weeks in Oslo

On sexta-feira, 16 de março de 2012 14.27.47, Frederik Gladhorn wrote: > we used to have a weekly email internally that would be a random collection > of what people did the last week. "This week in Oslo". Just make sure that people understand that their names and activities will be made public.

Re: [Development] The qtbase CI should run the qtdeclarative tests

Den 19. mars 2012 10:29, skrev ext Rohan McGovern: > Knoll Lars (Nokia-MP/Oslo) said: >> On 3/19/12 2:11 AM, "ext Rohan McGovern" wrote: >> >>> marius.storm-ol...@nokia.com said: While it's not normal to do this type of dependency "lock" for upwards dependencies, i think in this case we

Re: [Development] These weeks in Oslo

Frederik: > We didn't have this email in a while and I don't know how > regular we get around to sending it, but it might be > interesting. If everyone here thinks it's spam, we'll stop ;) I support your sending of this mail. I think it will be valuable in keeping everyone aware of: 1

Re: [Development] Qt 5 and old versions of XCB

On Sunday 18 March 2012 14:12:14 Bradley Smith wrote: > > opensuse 11.1 was released in 2008. that's a lot more than 18 months. > > Yes, openSUSE 11.1 was released Dec. 18, 2008, but it was updated as > recently as Jan 13, 2011. This makes the last supported update only a > little over 14 months o

Re: [Development] Commit policies and the Qt 5 alpha

On 3/19/12 9:19 AM, "ext Thorbjørn Martsum" wrote: >Hi Lars > >You are the boss :) - and I am not disagreeing that this should happen >rather sooner then later (it is actually happening very late if the final >release plan still says june), >but I however think it would be better (in the future)

Re: [Development] qHash / QHash changes

On segunda-feira, 19 de março de 2012 10.42.44, Thiago Macieira wrote: > [1] note that the order is stable. Two hashing tables with the same > elements must produce the same order. Actually, thinking a little more about this, I might be wrong. If two elements produce the same hashing value (be i

Re: [Development] qHash / QHash changes

On segunda-feira, 19 de março de 2012 11.17.29, André Somers wrote: > Op 19-3-2012 10:42, Thiago Macieira schreef: > > They shouldn't rely on that at all. The documentation of QHash says > > that it produces an arbitrary but stable[1] order. > > > > [1] note that the order is stable. Two hashing ta

Re: [Development] qHash / QHash changes

Op 19-3-2012 10:42, Thiago Macieira schreef: > They shouldn't rely on that at all. The documentation of QHash says > that it produces an arbitrary but stable[1] order. > [1] note that the order is stable. Two hashing tables with the same > elements must produce the same order. If I understood

Re: [Development] qHash / QHash changes

Am Montag, den 19.03.2012, 10:42 +0100 schrieb Thiago Macieira: > On segunda-feira, 19 de março de 2012 10.04.28, Mathias Hasselmann wrote: > > Am Montag, den 19.03.2012, 08:01 + schrieb Giuseppe D'Angelo: > > > 2) Document to end users that it cannot be assumed that qHash output or > > > QHash

Re: [Development] qHash / QHash changes

On segunda-feira, 19 de março de 2012 10.04.28, Mathias Hasselmann wrote: > Am Montag, den 19.03.2012, 08:01 + schrieb Giuseppe D'Angelo: > > 2) Document to end users that it cannot be assumed that qHash output or > > QHash iteration order are stable, so people must not rely on that. > > Would

Re: [Development] Commit policies and the Qt 5 alpha

On segunda-feira, 19 de março de 2012 09.19.56, Thorbjørn Martsum wrote: > but I however think it would be better (in the future) to announce such an > api soft freeze a few days before it happens. Please note that: 1) the announcement didn't change much. You were already supposed to be following

Re: [Development] Qt 5 and old versions of XCB

On segunda-feira, 19 de março de 2012 01.56.24, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote: > 2012/3/19 Bradley Smith : > >> "What is the minimum version of XCB required for Qt 5?" > >> > >> It appears that libxcb-1.5 and xcb-proto-1.6 are required. These releases > >> were announced Dec 3 2009 and Dec 2 2009 respect

Re: [Development] The qtbase CI should run the qtdeclarative tests

On segunda-feira, 19 de março de 2012 08.01.41, lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote: > >Yes, in some ways I feel this is adding complexity to the test setup to > >work around a "false simplicity" in our source code setup. We claim > >that Qt is modular, but actually we know some parts of it are not really,

Re: [Development] The qtbase CI should run the qtdeclarative tests

Knoll Lars (Nokia-MP/Oslo) said: > On 3/19/12 2:11 AM, "ext Rohan McGovern" wrote: > > >marius.storm-ol...@nokia.com said: > >> While it's not normal to do this type of dependency "lock" for upwards > >>dependencies, i think in this case we should indeed do the extra > >>checking. Not just becaus

Re: [Development] qHash / QHash changes

Am Montag, den 19.03.2012, 08:01 + schrieb Giuseppe D'Angelo: > 2) Document to end users that it cannot be assumed that qHash output or QHash > iteration order are stable, so people must not rely on that. Would that be sufficient to prevent 3rd-party code relying on stable iteration order from

Re: [Development] qHash / QHash changes

On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote: > While I don't want to get involved in a flame about what's the > Best String Hashing Algorithm Ever Devised By an Human Being™, > I still think there's some room for making that change to go in. to be clear, I abandoned this because: 1)

Re: [Development] Commit policies and the Qt 5 alpha

Hi Lars You are the boss :) - and I am not disagreeing that this should happen rather sooner then later (it is actually happening very late if the final release plan still says june), but I however think it would be better (in the future) to announce such an api soft freeze a few days before it ha

Re: [Development] The qtbase CI should run the qtdeclarative tests

On 3/19/12 2:11 AM, "ext Rohan McGovern" wrote: >marius.storm-ol...@nokia.com said: >> While it's not normal to do this type of dependency "lock" for upwards >>dependencies, i think in this case we should indeed do the extra >>checking. Not just because QtDeclarative is such an important tech for

[Development] qHash / QHash changes

Hi, sorry for the long message. It's a pity to see that the proposed (and +2'd by Lars) improvement to qHash(QString) [1] has been abandoned. While I don't want to get involved in a flame about what's the Best String Hashing Algorithm Ever Devised By an Human Being™, I still think there's some ro