On 9 February 2018 at 15:54, Lars Knoll wrote:
>> On 9 Feb 2018, at 07:52, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>>
>> André Pönitz wrote:
>>> I think you need to start differentiating between Qt-without-Webengine
>>> and QtWebengine.
>>>
>>> And maybe "we" should do that, too.
>>
>> I would be entirely in favor o
> On 9 Feb 2018, at 21:14, Jake Petroules wrote:
>
> Steve Jobs once said:
>
>> “I have looked in the mirror every morning and asked myself: "If today were
>> the last day of my life, would I want to do what I am about to do today?"
>> And whenever the answer has been "No" for too many days i
Steve Jobs once said:
> “I have looked in the mirror every morning and asked myself: "If today were
> the last day of my life, would I want to do what I am about to do today?" And
> whenever the answer has been "No" for too many days in a row, I know I need
> to change something.”
After 8 yea
On 9 February 2018 at 20:46, Ville Voutilainen
wrote:
>> But I am asking to do a minimal investigation. In most cases of blacklisting,
>> the test has been failing for days, if not months. Spending an hour or two to
>> understand why it's failing and whether it's something that only happens in
>>
On 9 February 2018 at 20:39, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Friday, 9 February 2018 08:32:20 PST Ville Voutilainen wrote:
>> On 9 February 2018 at 18:17, Thiago Macieira
> wrote:
>> > We do have BLACKLISTs this time and I complain every time I see one being
>> > added without even an attempt at figu
On Friday, 9 February 2018 10:04:30 PST Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
> Il 09/02/2018 16:57, Thiago Macieira ha scritto:
> > This release is too old. It still has Qt 5.6.
> >
> > But I know for a time openSUSE backported the OpenSSL 1.1 patch onto Qt
> > 5.9. Now Tumbleweed has Qt 5.10 anyway.
>
> The
On Friday, 9 February 2018 08:32:20 PST Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> On 9 February 2018 at 18:17, Thiago Macieira
wrote:
> > We do have BLACKLISTs this time and I complain every time I see one being
> > added without even an attempt at figuring out what's wrong with the test,
> > or when the match
Il 09/02/2018 16:57, Thiago Macieira ha scritto:
This release is too old. It still has Qt 5.6.
But I know for a time openSUSE backported the OpenSSL 1.1 patch onto Qt 5.9.
Now Tumbleweed has Qt 5.10 anyway.
The point isn't which version of Qt comes with the distribution, but the
binary builds
On 9 February 2018 at 18:17, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> We do have BLACKLISTs this time and I complain every time I see one being
> added without even an attempt at figuring out what's wrong with the test, or
> when the match is overly aggressive ("it fails on Ubuntu in the CI, so it must
It gives
On Friday, 9 February 2018 08:01:31 PST Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
> 09.02.2018, 18:57, "Thiago Macieira" :
> > On Friday, 9 February 2018 02:59:31 PST Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
> >> OpenSUSE Leap 42.3 also has 1.0.2 [7].
> >
> > This release is too old. It still has Qt 5.6.
>
> Note that people o
On Friday, 9 February 2018 00:42:55 PST Timur Pocheptsov wrote:
> Andy, do you have any feedback from our customers about this? My anecdotal
> evidence so far - I have 0 bug-reports complaining they see a message:
> "Incompatible version of OpenSSL" (qsslsocket_openssl_symbols.cpp, line
> 1025), th
On Friday, 9 February 2018 03:07:08 PST Olivier Goffart wrote:
> > Which will happen ALL the time. We'll never get back down: when we
> > released
> > Qt 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4, we were happy if only 10 tests failed (that only
> > happened for QWS). For the other platforms, the normal number was a
> > hu
09.02.2018, 18:57, "Thiago Macieira" :
> On Friday, 9 February 2018 02:59:31 PST Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
>> OpenSUSE Leap 42.3 also has 1.0.2 [7].
>
> This release is too old. It still has Qt 5.6.
Note that people often work on old distros with new Qt, installed from official
packages
>
> Bu
On Friday, 9 February 2018 02:59:31 PST Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
> OpenSUSE Leap 42.3 also has 1.0.2 [7].
This release is too old. It still has Qt 5.6.
But I know for a time openSUSE backported the OpenSSL 1.1 patch onto Qt 5.9.
Now Tumbleweed has Qt 5.10 anyway.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.ma
09.02.2018, 16:48, "Konstantin Tokarev" :
> 09.02.2018, 10:03, "Kevin Kofler" :
>> IMHO, you need to rethink your whole CI approach. This is increasingly being
>> the one bottleneck slowing down Qt development and releases. It might make
>> more sense to try a different approach, such as allow
09.02.2018, 10:03, "Kevin Kofler" :
> IMHO, you need to rethink your whole CI approach. This is increasingly being
> the one bottleneck slowing down Qt development and releases. It might make
> more sense to try a different approach, such as allowing all commits through
> initially, then making C
+1, and I'm surprised it wasn't already the case actually :)
--
Robin Burchell
ro...@crimson.no
On Fri, Feb 9, 2018, at 2:18 PM, Rainer Keller wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I'd like to nominate Kari Oikarinen for approver status in the Qt Project.
>
> Kari has been contributing to Qt for D
On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 14:18:56 +0100
Rainer Keller wrote:
> I'd like to nominate Kari Oikarinen for approver status in the Qt Project.
+1
Christian
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/deve
+1
Simon
From: Development on
behalf of Rainer Keller
Sent: Friday, February 9, 2018 2:18:56 PM
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: [Development] Nominating Kari Oikarinen for Approver Status
Hello everybody,
I'd like to nominate Kari Oikarinen for app
Hello everybody,
I'd like to nominate Kari Oikarinen for approver status in the Qt Project.
Kari has been contributing to Qt for Device Creation, COIN and several
other parts of the Qt project. He also is the maintainer of the Qt Debug
Bridge. His track record can be found under:
https://coderev
On 9 February 2018 at 13:07, Olivier Goffart wrote:
> Anyway, here is some example of models which works:
>
> In LLVM, devs commit directly. buildbots build the trunk continuously. In case
> of failure, the buildbot maintainer quickly find out which commit likely broke
> the test and reverts the c
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 12:07:08PM +0100, Olivier Goffart wrote:
> On other projects I've seen on github with travis and co.: the tests are run
> for every pull request individually, before it is integrated. The reviewer
> sees the result of the tests and decide whether to merge on not based on
09.02.2018, 14:07, "Olivier Goffart" :
> Am Freitag, 9. Februar 2018, 08:13:01 CET schrieb Thiago Macieira:
>> On Thursday, 8 February 2018 23:02:36 PST Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> > IMHO, you need to rethink your whole CI approach. This is increasingly
>> > being the one bottleneck slowing down Qt
Am Freitag, 9. Februar 2018, 08:13:01 CET schrieb Thiago Macieira:
> On Thursday, 8 February 2018 23:02:36 PST Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > IMHO, you need to rethink your whole CI approach. This is increasingly
> > being the one bottleneck slowing down Qt development and releases. It
> > might make more
On 08/02/18 19:45, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Only for 5.11 onward, so shouldn't affect the 5.6 and 5.9 LTS (which don't
> have OpenSSL 1.1 support anyway) or any 5.10.x releases still to come.
>
> As a bonus side-effect, users who hadn't realised they have an old, not-up-to-
> date OpenSSL will ha
Hi,
Freedesktop.org icon themes contain icons with mime-type names that are
accessible via QIcon::fromTheme() and widely used to use an appropriate image
for document icons.
On Mac, using setWindowFilePath() will also show an appropriate icon next to
the document filename, and I presume MS Win
On 09/02/2018, 9.51, "Development on behalf of Lars Knoll"
wrote:
> On 9 Feb 2018, at 08:13, Thiago Macieira
wrote:
>
> On Thursday, 8 February 2018 23:02:36 PST Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> IMHO, you need to rethink your whole CI approach. This is increasingly
being
I have had some people upgrading to 1.1 and asking us why it doesn’t work, so
we have told them to downgrade explaining why. I think it is the right thing to
do with the upgrade to 1.1, but I just want to try and prevent people
overwriting their existing version if they are using older versions
Andy, do you have any feedback from our customers about this? My anecdotal
evidence so far - I have 0 bug-reports complaining they see a message:
"Incompatible version of OpenSSL" (qsslsocket_openssl_symbols.cpp, line 1025),
this means for me people using our binaries mostly have OpenSSL version
29 matches
Mail list logo
