On Friday 24 October 2014 19:06:39 Roland Winklmeier wrote:
> > QSignalSpy::wait() isn't thread-safe because it's using QTestEventLoop
> > instead
> > of a regular QEventLoop. That former does use a timer and, unlike the
> > latter,
> > you can't stop the loop from outside the loop's own thread.
>
>
> QSignalSpy::wait() isn't thread-safe because it's using QTestEventLoop
> instead
> of a regular QEventLoop. That former does use a timer and, unlike the
> latter,
> you can't stop the loop from outside the loop's own thread.
>
That was indeed the origin of the warnings. They appeared after int
On Friday 24 October 2014 08:50:49 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Friday 24 October 2014 12:55:40 Olivier Goffart wrote:
> > How hard can it be for gerrit to compare the two diffs and see that their
> > are the same? No new patch set should be created if the rebase do not
> > change anything.
>
> I
On Friday 24 October 2014 15:41:20 Roland Winklmeier wrote:
> Dear list,
>
> quick question: I spotted the class QSignalSpy while writing unit tests for
> one of my projects. There was nothing written in the documentation, that it
> is not thread safe and had assumed it is. So I connected signals
On Thursday 23 October 2014 19:03:32 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> just to be clear, everybody is expected to use these scripts after they
> leave the beta phase.
> this will be technically enforced at some point.
Let me say I agree with Ossi that I *expect* everyone who has more than one
change in
On Friday 24 October 2014 12:55:40 Olivier Goffart wrote:
> How hard can it be for gerrit to compare the two diffs and see that their
> are the same? No new patch set should be created if the rebase do not
> change anything.
It did change something: the parent commit.
That alone needs to be rev
On Friday 24 October 2014 10:28:42 Kalinowski Maurice wrote:
> IIRC Thiago has been one of persons using it in the past, has it been seen
> beneficial or causing problems? What is the impression by others who have
> actually tested it so far?
I use another script, which served as inspiration for O
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 12:28:42PM +0200, Kalinowski Maurice wrote:
> Furthermore one of the concerns is to change the workflow with git
> compared to other projects beside Qt. After all, it is different
> commands to be used when pushing to Qt gerrit if your proposal is
> accepted. So the benefits
On Friday 24 October 2014 15:41:20 Roland Winklmeier wrote:
> Dear list,
>
> quick question: I spotted the class QSignalSpy while writing unit tests for
> one of my projects. There was nothing written in the documentation, that it
> is not thread safe and had assumed it is. So I connected signals
Dear list,
quick question: I spotted the class QSignalSpy while writing unit tests for
one of my projects. There was nothing written in the documentation, that it
is not thread safe and had assumed it is. So I connected signals from a
QObject running in a different thread and got several warnings
Another idea I came up with last time I accidentally rebased something:
Sometimes you will make a mistake and overwrite a change you didn't want to
overwrite. No script in the world can save you from that. After that has
happened we can basically say one of two things:
a, You should be punished
Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
> Sadly It is because of two things:
> 1. It crates new patchset, which sends notification and reset score
> 2. It breaks web diff.
> Both should be fixable on the Gerrit level
I agree that rebases are currently very frustrating for reviewers and
that you've spelled out the
> years of preaching "don't rebase unnecessarily" and "don't create
> spurious dependencies" being mostly ineffective.
I speak for all the people who play "Myst" by just walking around the island
enjoying the views and listening to the waves.
We don't know when it is necessary to rebase, except
El Friday 24 October 2014, jiaojinxing1...@gmail.com escribió:
> Now the latest qt 4.8 6 run on sylixos is very stable,
>
> And supports advanced features such qws and webkit.
> We are willing to contribute our code to qt organization.
That's great, but note that Qt 4 is feature frozen. I don't
On 24 Oct 2014, at 12:38, Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
>
> I admire that you want to improve everyones working process, but I think you
> took the wrong way. You are fixing the problem on odd level, I strongly
> believe
> that you should fix Gerrit, enforcing a tool on everyone is at the best far
On Friday 24 October 2014 12:38:29 Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I admire that you want to improve everyones working process, but I think you
> took the wrong way. You are fixing the problem on odd level, I strongly
> believe that you should fix Gerrit, enforcing a tool on everyone is at the
>
On Friday 24 of October 2014 11:37:29 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 10:26:20AM +0200, Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
> > On Thursday 23 of October 2014 19:03:32 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > > just to be clear, everybody is expected to use these scripts after they
> > > leave the beta
>
> > Anyways, you missed the chance to convince people from the
> awesomeness
> > of your script before pissing everybody off with your megalomania.
> >
> i don't need to convince anyone of its awesomeness - the script will do that
> itself. otoh, your obstinate refusal to even try it doesn't spe
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 11:45:21AM +0200, Joerg Bornemann wrote:
> On 24-Oct-14 11:37, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> >> What is rationale for the "technical enforcement"?
> >>
> > years of preaching "don't rebase unnecessarily" and "don't create
> > spurious dependencies" being mostly ineffective. "i
On 24-Oct-14 11:37, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
>> What is rationale for the "technical enforcement"?
>>
> years of preaching "don't rebase unnecessarily" and "don't create
> spurious dependencies" being mostly ineffective. "i pushed an update to
> your change, take care not to overwrite it accident
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 10:26:20AM +0200, Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
> On Thursday 23 of October 2014 19:03:32 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > just to be clear, everybody is expected to use these scripts after they
> > leave the beta phase.
> > this will be technically enforced at some point.
>
> Now,
I know that VideoCapture runs on Android by itself. There are good
reasons why I forked CvCapture_Android (horrible Android backend for
VideoCapture) and wrote CVCaptureAndroid. If you want to see how bad is
the original, try to run VideoCapture by itself on Android, you will see
that it' not e
On Thursday 23. October 2014 19.03.32 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> just to be clear, everybody is expected to use these scripts after they
> leave the beta phase.
> this will be technically enforced at some point.
Sorry Ossi, your calendar is broken. It's not April the first today.
- Paul
On Thursday 23 of October 2014 19:03:32 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> just to be clear, everybody is expected to use these scripts after they
> leave the beta phase.
> this will be technically enforced at some point.
Hi,
Now, you got my attention. To be honest I'm a bit surprised. Personally I
di
24 matches
Mail list logo
