On Monday 10 August 2015 20:01:18 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > In the soft branching period, we're still allowed to commit new features
> > to dev that have been ready for some time, correct?
> >
> >
>
> yeah, there is some confusion going on here ...
> the "vibe" seems to be that big things (n
Hi Oswald
On 10/08/15 13:01, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> the description on launchpad:
>
>> This projects contains code to integrate Qt with the Mir display
>> server as follows:
>> - a QPA plugin to enable Qt applications as Mir clients
>> - a QPA plugin and support module to enable Qt/QML be a
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 10:27:18AM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Friday 07 August 2015 10:06:33 Heikkinen Jani wrote:
> > So if nothing new turns out later today/during the weekend Qt 5.6 feature
> > freeze is on Monday morning and we will start branching. We will use soft
> > branching like e
Will the Qt Purchasing module be available in the open source version of Qt
5.6 since it's been available in the commercial version? If so, will it be
"pre-built," my preferred choice, or will users have to manually build it
for each desired platform?
Steve
-Original Message-
From: T
On Friday 07 August 2015 10:06:33 Heikkinen Jani wrote:
> So if nothing new turns out later today/during the weekend Qt 5.6 feature
> freeze is on Monday morning and we will start branching. We will use soft
> branching like earlier so there should be enough time to finalize ongoing
> changes for Q
On 2015-08-09 21:58, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Monday 10 August 2015 02:36:20 Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> realloc doesn't work if you are inserting or removing in the middle of a
>> vector.
>
> Sure it does. It's required if you need to insert anywhere but don't have
> enough space.
>
> Now, if you
On 2015-08-09 07:58, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Thiago Macieira wrote:
>> Please see the C++17 proposal of destructive moves instead.
>
> It took 4 years for Qt to agree to require a limited subset of C++11, so,
> realistically, C++17 features are not likely to end up used (everywhere, at
> least) be
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 02:36:34PM +0200, Paul Olav Tvete wrote:
> On Monday 10. August 2015 14.01.41 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > the description on launchpad:
> > > This projects contains code to integrate Qt with the Mir display
> > > server as follows:
> > > - a QPA plugin to enable Qt applica
On Monday 10. August 2015 14.01.41 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> the description on launchpad:
> > This projects contains code to integrate Qt with the Mir display
> > server as follows:
> > - a QPA plugin to enable Qt applications as Mir clients
> > - a QPA plugin and support module to enable Qt/QML
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 12:53:34PM +0100, Gerry Boland wrote:
> Hey folks,
> I'm the Canonical project lead for QtMir - or QtMirServer as we'll now call
> it.
>
the description on launchpad:
> This projects contains code to integrate Qt with the Mir display
> server as follows:
> - a QPA plugin
Hey folks,
I'm the Canonical project lead for QtMir - or QtMirServer as we'll now call it.
We will be pushing all our QtMirServer work into this repository. My goal is
for all QtMirServer work to occur in this repository, but naturally
transitioning to that situation will take us time.
Thanks f
+2 :)
Cheers,
Lars
On 10/08/15 11:59, "BogDan" wrote:
>
>+1
>
>
>
>
>
>On Monday, August 10, 2015 12:02 PM, Paul Olav Tvete
> wrote:
>
>
>
>Hi,
>
>I would like to propose a new playground repository for upstreaming the
>QtMir
>project from Canonical:
>
>https://code.launchpad.net/~mir-team/qtm
On Monday 10. August 2015 10.59.17 Richard Moore wrote:
> On 10 August 2015 at 10:01, Paul Olav Tvete
>
> wrote:
> > I would like to propose a new playground repository for upstreaming the
> > QtMir
>
> > project from Canonical:
> Will the canonical developers be working directly in this reposi
On 10 August 2015 at 10:01, Paul Olav Tvete
wrote:
> I would like to propose a new playground repository for upstreaming the
> QtMir
> project from Canonical:
>
Will the canonical developers be working directly in this repository? If
so do we need to consider how their changes will be reviewed
+1
On Monday, August 10, 2015 12:02 PM, Paul Olav Tvete
wrote:
Hi,
I would like to propose a new playground repository for upstreaming the QtMir
project from Canonical:
https://code.launchpad.net/~mir-team/qtmir/trunk
I propose the name "qtmirserver", since it is more descriptiv
On 08/10/2015 11:01 AM, Paul Olav Tvete wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to propose a new playground repository for upstreaming the QtMir
> project from Canonical:
>
> https://code.launchpad.net/~mir-team/qtmir/trunk
>
> I propose the name "qtmirserver", since it is more descriptive than "qtmir".
> Th
Hi,
I would like to propose a new playground repository for upstreaming the QtMir
project from Canonical:
https://code.launchpad.net/~mir-team/qtmir/trunk
I propose the name "qtmirserver", since it is more descriptive than "qtmir".
The name "qtmirextras" should be reserved for platform specifi
Harald — I filed a few bug tickets with example code for some of these issues,
as noted below.
- Randy
> On Aug 9, 2015, at 11:35 PM, Harald Vistnes wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have played with the tech preview of Qt3D 2.0 and I have some questions and
> wishes.
>
> 1. Transparency. It does not se
18 matches
Mail list logo
