On Friday 27 June 2014 09:41:13 Thiago Macieira wrote:
[snip]
> I also noticed quite a few reviews that were completely approved and ready
> to be submitted, but never were because the owner didn't realise they had
> to press the button. I did press the button for those people where I could.
Bein
Em sex 27 jun 2014, às 22:57:09, Giuseppe D'Angelo escreveu:
> On 27 June 2014 22:10, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > Sounds like a good compromise to me.
> >
> > If a module wants to release out-of-schedule, it will need to use an extra
> > version number, like 5.4.0.1.
>
> The problem with such sch
On 27 June 2014 22:10, Thiago Macieira wrote:
>
>
> Sounds like a good compromise to me.
>
> If a module wants to release out-of-schedule, it will need to use an extra
> version number, like 5.4.0.1.
The problem with such scheme is that it doesn't make it obvious that
there might be a huge differ
Em sex 27 jun 2014, às 21:28:41, André Pönitz escreveu:
> This pretty much sounds like "If a module uses private API it should
> follow Qt Core numbering, if it doesn't it's free to pick anything."
Sounds like a good compromise to me.
If a module wants to release out-of-schedule, it will need to
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:28:14AM +, Koehne Kai wrote:
>
>
> > -Original Message- From:
> > development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org [...] We'll
> > always have a 1-to-1 mapping of QtWebEngine and Qt versions and we'll
> > always distribute/test them together. If we re
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 10:22:38AM +0200, Frederik Gladhorn wrote:
> Torsdag 26. juni 2014 18.14.49 skrev Thiago Macieira:
> > I've just counted: I have 203 pending reviews for me. At least half of them
> > haven't been updated in six months. Some of them are for the old master and
> > api_changes
Em sex 27 jun 2014, às 10:22:38, Frederik Gladhorn escreveu:
> Torsdag 26. juni 2014 18.14.49 skrev Thiago Macieira:
> > I've just counted: I have 203 pending reviews for me. At least half of
> > them
> > haven't been updated in six months. Some of them are for the old master
> > and
> > api_change
Em sex 27 jun 2014, às 10:57:14, Stephen Kelly escreveu:
> > I guess this is a subject for when and if the situation happens again.
>
> Make that suggestion next time too.
>
> The enginio situation happened because it was not actually discussed.
Because it was allowed under the previous guidelin
Hi!
I'm trying to run a Qt application on WEC2013. Has anyone done this yet,
and is it even possible?
I am completely new to Qt. I was thinking I should configure qmake to
compile the application for a WEC2013 SDK.
First I was thinking I could use the configure file for wec7, but since
wec2013 i
Hi,
We are currently developing Qt WebEngine as a qt-labs project.
Now we would like Qt WebEngine to become an official Qt add-on module.
I am therefore requesting to move the repository from:
qt-labs/qtwebengine to qt/qtwebengine.
This will also be a step in the direction of releasing Qt Web
Hi,
It seems that Jocelyn answered most of the questions, but I put my answers
anyway :-)
On Wednesday 25 of June 2014 15:42:36 Stephen Kelly wrote:
> (...)
>> Conclusion 1) Even if a Qt module has a disparate version scheme, bumping
> its major version and changing its SONAME are not acceptabl
> -Original Message-
> From: development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org
> [...]
> We'll always have a 1-to-1 mapping of QtWebEngine and Qt versions and
> we'll always distribute/test them together. If we release QtWebEngine 1.u.v
> with Qt 5.x.y, then QtWebEngine 1.u+1.v will
Hello,
we're soon going through this process with QtWebEngine, so let's use this
as a concrete example. We can possibly use this as a guideline for future
Qt module as well.
We already went through some discussion, and I'll share our plan here, but
nothing is set in stone so let's see if we need
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 04:34:39PM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> The new one appears to[*] mark with bold anything that has had comments since
> the last time you commented or voted on. While that's nice to remind people
> to
> read, there's no way to mark it as read, short of posting a commen
On Thursday, June 26, 2014 08:38:01 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Em qui 26 jun 2014, às 09:52:20, Stephen Kelly escreveu:
> > > > > > Therefore
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > major version must stay the same until Qt 6.
> > > > >
> > > > > Why is it not acceptable?
> > > >
> > > > Because Lars did not a
Torsdag 26. juni 2014 18.14.49 skrev Thiago Macieira:
> I've just counted: I have 203 pending reviews for me. At least half of them
> haven't been updated in six months. Some of them are for the old master and
> api_changes branches and will never, ever be accepted unless resubmitted.
>
> Last we
16 matches
Mail list logo
