On 21 Jan 2015, at 08:19, Turunen Tuukka
wrote:
>
> On 20/01/15 21:44, "Thiago Macieira" wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday 20 January 2015 19:21:04 Sarajärvi Tony wrote:
What's your timeline for this?
>>>
>>> If I don't get any objections here, I could start the work immediately.
>>> Goal
>>> is
On 20/01/15 21:44, "Thiago Macieira" wrote:
>On Tuesday 20 January 2015 19:21:04 Sarajärvi Tony wrote:
>> > What's your timeline for this?
>>
>> If I don't get any objections here, I could start the work immediately.
>>Goal
>> is to do it right away, so that we have time to verify the platforms
I don't think so.
for example, the GUI of the qt creator, can purely implemented by qml?
and, if I will developa GUI like visual studio, can I use qml instead of
c++?
2015-01-21 2:33 GMT+08:00 Tomaz Canabrava :
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 3:32 PM, techabc wrote:
>
>> Is there any plans to com
On Tuesday 20 January 2015 16:01:59 Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 January 2015 15:39:28 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> [snip]
>
> > but this is already the case, and has been since qt2. so that ship has
> > sailed. in fact, when rex was pushing for the qmake-qt5 scheme, t
On Tuesday 20 January 2015 19:21:04 Sarajärvi Tony wrote:
> > What's your timeline for this?
>
> If I don't get any objections here, I could start the work immediately. Goal
> is to do it right away, so that we have time to verify the platforms before
> 5.5 feature freeze.
> > If you're looking at
> -Original Message-
> From: development-bounces+tony.sarajarvi=theqtcompany.com@qt-
> project.org [mailto:development-
> bounces+tony.sarajarvi=theqtcompany@qt-project.org] On Behalf Of
> Thiago Macieira
> Sent: 20. tammikuuta 2015 18:21
> To: development@qt-project.org
> Subject: Re
On Tuesday 20 January 2015 19:35:33 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 10:04:51AM -0800, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > On Tuesday 20 January 2015 18:59:46 Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > > > given that the problems specific to distros have been adequately
> > > > solved (even if you find that
On Tuesday 20 January 2015 15:39:28 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
[snip]
> but this is already the case, and has been since qt2. so that ship has
> sailed. in fact, when rex was pushing for the qmake-qt5 scheme, the
> debian (?) guys made clear that they'll keep their qmake5 (?) scheme
> anyway - they
On Tuesday 20 January 2015 10:04:51 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 January 2015 18:59:46 Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > > given that the problems specific to distros have been adequately solved
> > > (even if you find that hacky - which it certainly is in case of badly
> > > written build systems)
On Tuesday 20 January 2015 22:39:09 Arjun Das wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am a beginner to QT framework, however i have solved all errors till now.
> But I am stuck on this one. Compilation of qt5 with qt3d module is failing
> for me in windows. I have given the following configuration:
Be sure to get a r
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 06:59:46PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > but that work has already been done, long ago. even adjusting it to qt6
> > at some point will be a rather trivial effort (and zero for you if you
> > bothered to upstream build system improvements that ma
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 3:32 PM, techabc wrote:
> Is there any plans to complite QT QUICK for desktop as QWidgets as well?
>
It already is.
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
On Tuesday 20 January 2015 18:59:46 Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > given that the problems specific to distros have been adequately solved
> > (even if you find that hacky - which it certainly is in case of badly
> > written build systems), i don't see why we should bother changing
> > anything at this po
Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> but that work has already been done, long ago. even adjusting it to qt6
> at some point will be a rather trivial effort (and zero for you if you
> bothered to upstream build system improvements that make upstream
> packages work out of the box with packaged qt).
We do t
Is there any plans to complite QT QUICK for desktop as QWidgets as well?
2015-01-07 22:11 GMT+08:00 Luke Parry :
> Hi Bo,
>
> Thank you for your advice. I think one fault lies is my confidence of
> whether QML is right for the job due to my inexperience.
>
> Currently my GUI is QML which is fanta
On Tuesday 20 January 2015 22:39:09 Arjun Das wrote:
> I am a beginner to QT framework, however i have solved all errors till now.
> But I am stuck on this one. Compilation of qt5 with qt3d module is failing
> for me in windows. I have given the following configuration:
Is that a qtbase 5.5 (dev)
Hi,
I am a beginner to QT framework, however i have solved all errors till now.
But I am stuck on this one. Compilation of qt5 with qt3d module is failing
for me in windows. I have given the following configuration:
configure -debug-and-release -opensource -platform win32-msvc2012 -opengl
desktop
On Tuesday 20 January 2015 11:38:24 Sarajärvi Tony wrote:
> - OSX 10.7 will be dropped in 'dev' branch.
What's your timeline for this? If you're looking at this for before the Qt 5.5
feature freeze, OS X 10.7 will break and will be effectively unsupported for
5.5 because I won't bother fixing fo
Sigh get a room (on irc fex) guys. Mailbox full already ;-).
Andreas Aardal Hanssen
> Den 20. jan. 2015 kl. 17.08 skrev Thiago Macieira :
>
> On Tuesday 20 January 2015 11:28:10 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
>>> So no, don't tell us qtchooser is not meant to solve distros'
>>> problems. It's meant e
On Tuesday 20 January 2015 11:28:10 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > So no, don't tell us qtchooser is not meant to solve distros'
> > problems. It's meant exactly for them.
> >
> >
>
> but i do. my purpose was to keep the imo (slightly) detrimental change
> out of qt, and enabling our developer use
On Tuesday 20 January 2015 13:43:53 Kevin Kofler wrote:
> In the Qt case, whether we install the Qt binaries to /usr/lib(64)/qt5/bin
> or /opt/fedora/qt5/bin does not really change anything, except that only
> the former supports multilib qmake. There can still be only one unsuffixed
> binary fou
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 01:55:41PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Some programs need adaptations to build on distros because they do not
> expect the binary names we ship.
>
but that work has already been done, long ago. even adjusting it to qt6
at some point will be a rather trivial effort (and zer
Thiago Macieira wrote:
> If we get any issues reported to us about Fedora or RHEL's non-renamed
> binaries, we'll send back to you, with the recommendation that people file
> bug reports about not using qtchooser. I already do that.
Now you're being a little over-dramatic, imo.
Users in this cas
Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> but i do. my purpose was to keep the imo (slightly) detrimental change
> out of qt, and enabling our developer use case to be convenient. i never
> considered the distro case relevant as such - i demonstrated why it is a
> non-issue back then, and i did it again in my pr
Thiago Macieira wrote:
> The FHS does not restrict /opt to admin-installed packages. It simply says
> "add-on application software packages", unlike /usr/local, for which it
> says " for use by the system administrator when installing software
> locally".
Fedora has historically interpreted "add-o
Milian Wolff wrote:
> Did you just create that? If so, then it would need to get published by
> you as a patch as you are the author.
Yes, I wrote that function. I can submit it through Gerrit if you think this
is a useful contribution.
I guess there will be some discussion about how to handle e
On Tuesday 20 January 2015 04:32:21 Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Milian Wolff wrote:
> > It can, indeed. But funnily enough it's not going to be much faster, at
> > least in the tests I did. Still, one should probably be doing this
> > anyways. I'll try to dig up my patch for that and sent it to Gerrit. I
Hi all!
Thanks for all the feedback we received. Based on those and the changes needed
we have updated our proposal a bit.
Binary packages are currently built with Ubuntu 11.10 because they deploy on
different distros quite well. That's something we aim for, so that we don't
have to start crea
Hi Pasi,
We have already forked and currently maintain a separate fork of three.js that
is compatible with Qt3dCanvas so including that fork’s code as included 3rd
party source code seems like the obvious thing to do. You have my support in
doing this.
We should not optimise for what makes th
Hi everyone,
So far it seems there has been some positive answers from the community,
but the distribution packaging side seems to have most comments against
inclusion of the three.js library or at least have comments on HOW it
should be included. Sorry, I¹m dropping out of the ³qtchooser² thread
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 07:30:46PM -0800, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 January 2015 04:05:20 Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > > correct. as far as i'm concerned, the purpose of qtchooser is to
> > > be a frontend tool which targets developers working with multiple
> >
On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 9:42 PM, Thiago Macieira
wrote:
> I'd like to hear someone from Enterprise Qt here too. My opinion is that we
> should accept the feature but make it an optional build-time dependency or
> an
> optional run-time dependency. That way, Enterprise Qt does not need a
> licenc
On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:55:51AM -0300, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
wrote:
> - We could just hope for the same-named tools to behave in the same way. But
> would it be a bug if they start not doing so? Allow me an example. Due to the
> fact that Qt4 existed before Qt5 we need to set th
33 matches
Mail list logo
