On 10/03/16 08:18, "Development on behalf of Alan Alpert"
wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 1:56 AM, Frederik Gladhorn
> wrote:
>> We are in the luxury position of having two great candidates.
>> I briefly talked to both Robin and Shawn yesterday and one option would be to
>> have a shared maintai
On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 1:56 AM, Frederik Gladhorn
wrote:
> We are in the luxury position of having two great candidates.
> I briefly talked to both Robin and Shawn yesterday and one option would be to
> have a shared maintainership. This seems to have worked nicely for Qt
> Networking and dividing
Hi,
While I understand that this would help you, I don’t think this is a good idea.
QSettings has is’s share of implementation issues, and would at some point
benefit from cleaning up or (more likely) rewriting the internals. I wouldn’t
want to add to it’s public API right now, as that would m
QSettings kinda lacks in consistency when you write data to it as in:
1) it loses all comments
2) it randomly reorders values
While I understand such things were never in scope for this class, for ppl
who need above mentioned things, it is either go away from QSettings (which
is ugly, cause why are
We are in the luxury position of having two great candidates.
I briefly talked to both Robin and Shawn yesterday and one option would be to
have a shared maintainership. This seems to have worked nicely for Qt
Networking and dividing the responsibilty will lessen the burden.
I'm looking forward
