Re: [Development] abandoning stale changes on gerrit

On sexta-feira, 1 de fevereiro de 2013 10.59.47, Alan Alpert wrote: > I actually disagree that any abandoned commits are "trash" (or > possibly I just don't see the distinction between trash and not > interested in anymore). +1 to Alan's definition. I have several commits that implement something

Re: [Development] QtMobility bugs lead info

On 01/02/13 18:41, Knoll Lars wrote: > Sounds like a left over from Nokia times. I've now fixed if for the parts > where we have maintainers to be in line with Qt 5. > I could have sworn it listed the proper maintainers previously. Thanks for that! > Cheers, > Lars > > > On Jan 29, 2013, at 8:4

Re: [Development] Qt Hebrew

Op 1-2-2013 17:41, Genghis Khan schreef: > On Fri, 1 Feb 2013 09:26:24 + > Knoll Lars wrote: > >> On Jan 31, 2013, at 4:13 PM, Genghis Khan wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I would like to initiate a new group >>> called "Qt Hebrew" for Hebrew speakers, where new an

Re: [Development] abandoning stale changes on gerrit

On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 11:28 PM, Peter Kümmel wrote: > On 01.02.2013 01:37, Alan Alpert wrote: >> >> That said, I'd prefer it for us to reach a consensus that the >> abandoned state should mean abandoned (adj 2 of >> http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/abandoned) instead of destroyed (past >> participl

Re: [Development] Proposal - QtSerialPort graduation from the Playground

To summarize the automated testing topic. 1) QtMock will not reach a usable state any soon, unfortunately. 2) I am not sure which construction of the aforementioned ones would fit the operation of the CI machines. Could anyone please comment on that with the relevant competence? 3) Is this a blo

Re: [Development] Qt Hebrew

On Fri, 1 Feb 2013 09:26:24 + Knoll Lars wrote: > > On Jan 31, 2013, at 4:13 PM, Genghis Khan wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > I would like to initiate a new group > > called "Qt Hebrew" for Hebrew speakers, where new and potential > > Hebrew speaking contributor

Re: [Development] abandoning stale changes on gerrit

On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 09:07:06PM +0100, André Pönitz wrote: > I have not seen any reasoning beyond "I ignore what you say" why > abandoning any change that is _not_ on your dashboard would help to > solve the problem you have with the size of your dashboard. > i never claimed that. it's not abou

Re: [Development] abandoning stale changes on gerrit

On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 09:58:41AM +, Knoll Lars wrote: > This discussion is in many ways similar to discussions on how to > handle bug reports. I had many discussions over the years about > whether to automatically close old bug reports (say older than a year > or two) or not. So far there hav

Re: [Development] Code Coverage of QtBase - new report available online

I have added a summary of your suggestion in the froglogic forum: http://www.froglogic.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=430&start=0 You can add your comments here. Just note, that all messages are going to the moderation queue to avoid spams. Am 01.02.2013 um 12:04 schrieb Thiago Macieira : > O

Re: [Development] Code Coverage of QtBase - new report available online

On sexta-feira, 1 de fevereiro de 2013 11.26.20, Sébastien Fricker wrote: > > qtsdk master doesn't make sense for daily reports because it only moves > > during release times. It would need to be the qt5.git repository and we > > go back to a choice of the three branches. > > So you would prefer to

Re: [Development] BlackBerry Jenkins server (was: Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms)

On 11/07/2012 03:30 PM, Peter Hartmann wrote: > (...) > But our plan is absolutely to have test and build results public, and > make the setup stable enough to at some point tie into the Qt CI > infrastructure. Update: the server is now online at http://195.3.174.130/ . Currently it is only runni

Re: [Development] Code Coverage of QtBase - new report available online

> > qtsdk master doesn't make sense for daily reports because it only moves > during > release times. It would need to be the qt5.git repository and we go back to a > choice of the three branches. So you would prefer to track the coverage of the dev branch of each module? But this would not b

Re: [Development] Code Coverage of QtBase - new report available online

We use the following repository for the code coverage statistic: http://qt.gitorious.org/qtsdk And we compute only the code coverage from QtBase. The reason is that we plan to cover all Qt modules in the future. So the 'master' branch is not the 'master' branch from QtBase, but from QtSdk reposi

Re: [Development] Code Coverage of QtBase - new report available online

On sexta-feira, 1 de fevereiro de 2013 10.52.06, Sergio Ahumada wrote: > I asked him the same some time ago .. I think that we meant 'master' > branch of qtsdk.git .. which points to qt#release qtsdk master doesn't make sense for daily reports because it only moves during release times. It would

[Development] Bumping Qt 5 version to 5.0.2

Hi, After yesterday's release, we are planning to bump the Qt 5 version to 5.0.2. The first change is https://codereview.qt-project.org/46472 Empty change log files for other modules will come after this change is approved. Merges from release->stable are on their way. Cheers, -- Sergio Ahum

Re: [Development] abandoning stale changes on gerrit

On Feb 1, 2013, at 1:37 AM, Alan Alpert <4163654...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Rutledge Shawn > wrote: >> >> On 29 Jan 2013, at 1:41 PM, Sorvig Morten wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jan 29, 2013, at 1:05 PM, Oswald Buddenhagen >>> wrote: >>> moin *, 5.0 is

Re: [Development] Code Coverage of QtBase - new report available online

On 02/01/2013 10:45 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote: > On sexta-feira, 1 de fevereiro de 2013 07.11.13, Sébastien Fricker wrote: >> Hi, >> the Qt5 code coverage report is displaying now the code coverage report of >> the modifications since Qt5.0.0. > > Thanks for the report! > >> So for QtBase 3 reports

Re: [Development] Code Coverage of QtBase - new report available online

On sexta-feira, 1 de fevereiro de 2013 07.11.13, Sébastien Fricker wrote: > Hi, > the Qt5 code coverage report is displaying now the code coverage report of > the modifications since Qt5.0.0. Thanks for the report! > So for QtBase 3 reports are now online: > The actual coverage report of the mas

Re: [Development] abandoning stale changes on gerrit

On sexta-feira, 1 de fevereiro de 2013 08.40.10, Peter Kümmel wrote: > > The problem with the original request to simply make all changes > > "abandoned" is that it will destroy the differentiation between > > "trash" and "not interested in atm". > > Another problem is that some touches your change

Re: [Development] Qt Hebrew

On Jan 31, 2013, at 4:13 PM, Genghis Khan wrote: > Hello, > > I would like to initiate a new group > called "Qt Hebrew" for Hebrew speakers, where new and potential Hebrew > speaking contributors to Qt and to Qt software will be able to join and > to share their p

Re: [Development] Closing Jira Bugs

On Jan 30, 2013, at 11:07 PM, Richard Moore mailto:r...@kde.org>> wrote: On 30 January 2013 20:24, Alan Alpert <4163654...@gmail.com> wrote: To muddy the waters further, wasn't the problem being that the person wanting the task closed wasn't the assignee? I thoug

Re: [Development] QtMobility bugs lead info

Sounds like a left over from Nokia times. I've now fixed if for the parts where we have maintainers to be in line with Qt 5. Cheers, Lars On Jan 29, 2013, at 8:46 PM, Lorn Potter wrote: > Hi, > I just noticed all the QtMobility bugs list satu makela as the lead for > all components. > Since