On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Olivier Goffart wrote:
> On Monday 12 May 2014 11:48:21 Ulf Hermann wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > we currently have several implementations of the QML debug protocol used
> > to transmit data between a debugger or profiler and the application
> > being debugged or profi
Em ter 27 maio 2014, às 14:21:40, Thiago Macieira escreveu:
> As it turns out, I didn't test it in all modules with Visual Studio. I've
> just fixed one problem in QtScript and we have one left in qtlocation for
> QtLocation which makes no sense to me and I can't reproduce.
I have a workaround fo
Hello
This is your friendly note that all Qt modules that don't have C or assembly
code are now using precompiled headers. I've tested this solution for a couple
of months with GCC on Linux, Clang on Linux, Clang on Mac and the Intel
compiler on Linux.
As it turns out, I didn't test it in all
On May 22, 2014, at 8:55 AM, Joerg Bornemann wrote:
> On 21-May-14 21:36, Kuba Ober wrote:
>
>> Bootstrapping is about the only possible glitch I see with Qt being built
>> with QBS.
>> I mean, good luck bootstrapping QML without Qt built. Or is that something
>> that wouldn’t be that hard?
>
El 27/05/14 20:14, Thiago Macieira escribió:
> Em ter 27 maio 2014, às 01:10:04, Thiago Macieira escreveu:
>> Also, please note that the discussion some months ago ended with both Ossi
>> and I recommending that the tag be merged back into the branch for the
>> minor series. That is, 5.3.0 gets ta
Em ter 27 maio 2014, às 01:10:04, Thiago Macieira escreveu:
> Also, please note that the discussion some months ago ended with both Ossi
> and I recommending that the tag be merged back into the branch for the
> minor series. That is, 5.3.0 gets tagged as v5.3.0 on release and v5.3.0 s
> merged in
Em ter 27 maio 2014, às 14:12:50, Stephen Kelly escreveu:
> The above differences in the naming convention seem needless. The module
> could be versioned independently without that inconsistency in the
> filenames.
>
> The library filenames for Enginio do not have a version in their basename
> at
> > I suppose another consideration would be setting the scale based on the
> > monitor you're on. I don't know how developed Android's multi monitor
> > support is, but if you wanted your application to change scale when it
> > moved across different density displays, I imagine the platform plu
On Monday, May 26, 2014 21:30:01 Sergio Ahumada wrote:
> El 26/05/14 20:54, Stephen Kelly escribió:
> > Hello,
> >
> > This tweet was brought to my attention:
> > https://twitter.com/Korchkidu/status/470850176366968832
> >
> > and it is true that the cmake files generated contain the incorrect
Hi all,
Now when Qt 5.3.0 is released it is time to start putting focus to Qt 5.4 as
well. There is only a bit more than two months to Qt 5.4 feature freeze, which
is planned to happen 8.8.2014, see http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-5.4-release
We need to get some kind of understanding which new fe
On 27 May 2014, at 11:47, Daiwei Li wrote:
> Hi Morten,
>
> My understanding of your platform independent change was that it would let
> the scale factor be set by the user at runtime with an environment variable.
> Is it meant to replace all platform plugin scaling (I.e. iOS and OSX) or
> au
Hi Morten,
My understanding of your platform independent change was that it would let
the scale factor be set by the user at runtime with an environment
variable. Is it meant to replace all platform plugin scaling (I.e. iOS and
OSX) or augment it?
It seems to me that Android could indeed leverage
On 26 May 2014, at 22:40, Daiwei Li wrote:
> I took a stab at adding high DPI support to Android and created a review
> here: https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,86260. I would appreciate any
> feedback (e.g. what tests need to be added, what other corner cases need to
> scaled, etc...)
Em ter 27 maio 2014, às 09:26:38, Oswald Buddenhagen escreveu:
> > I don’t see any problems with having named branches for patch level
> > releases, and it is what we agreed to some months ago. Can you explain why
> > you’d want to remove the branches once the release is done?
> >
> >
>
> let's s
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 06:25:37AM +, Knoll Lars wrote:
> On 26/05/14 21:59, "Thiago Macieira" wrote:
> >I've just seen that all the Qt repositories got a 5.3.0 branch
>
and they lost the release branches a minute later. it was a renaming.
> >(including those for which a release not called "5
15 matches
Mail list logo
