On 2018-06-14 02:08, Thiago Macieira wrote:
[...]
For example, the next data model over would be XML. And we are indeed missing
a DOM structure for it since we deprecated QDomDocument. Can anyone see a data
structure that works for both JSON/CBOR and generic XML? More importantly, one
that is wor
I’ve posted notes from the session: https://wiki.qt.io/QtCS2018_RemoteObjects
Thanks to everyone who participated, and feel free to update if you see
anything I missed.
Regards,
Brett
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists
El jueves, 14 de junio de 2018 10:19:51 -03 Kevin Funk escribió:
> On Thursday, 7 June 2018 08:03:40 CEST Thiago Macieira wrote:
[snip]
> Heya,
>
> Patch for restoring qt5_use_modules() is here:
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/232367/
yay, thanks a lot! I have read your comment on addi
There exists a need to store, load, and transmit strucured data in almost any application. Te topic at hand is the consideration of a generic format. Sure, you could create a relational database, but if you're nto trying to minimize writes and adapt your application to SQL, it's waste of effort. QD
On Thursday, 14 June 2018 06:47:56 PDT Jean-Michaël Celerier wrote:
> > So YAML makes a lot of sense.
>
> https://github.com/yaml/YAML2/wiki/People-Raging-About-YAML
> https://users.rust-lang.org/t/why-does-cargo-use-toml/3577/15
>
> I would like to understand what all this discussion is about. W
> So YAML makes a lot of sense.
https://github.com/yaml/YAML2/wiki/People-Raging-About-YAML
https://users.rust-lang.org/t/why-does-cargo-use-toml/3577/15
I would like to understand what all this discussion is about. What is the
goal for Qt ?
a) allow developers using Qt to have a simple, human-r
On Thursday, 14 June 2018 06:19:51 PDT Kevin Funk wrote:
> Heya,
>
> Patch for restoring qt5_use_modules() is here:
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/232367/
Thanks, Kevin!
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
On Thursday, 7 June 2018 08:03:40 CEST Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Commit 02ed1b36daebed5f3997bb676cf5e818c0db9d3c was
>
> Remove CMake code for CMake < 3.1
>
> This removes the following functions from Qt5CoreMacros:
> - qt5_use_modules(...)
>
> Which follows 2013's d9ea4bb1441534cfb92
On Wednesday, 13 June 2018 23:46:54 PDT Lars Knoll wrote:
> I’d leave XML out of this. It is difficult to integrate, as it has so many
> special features (entities, CDATA and lot of other things) making it a
> rather complex specification. But there are a couple of other formats that
> might fit a
Yes, that is another issue. But before that qtbase issue started showing up,
the same change to 5.11.1 that you're trying to integrated failed when running
a test that launches a separate process of testing the debugging integration.
So once the qtbase issue is resolved it's likely that you'll
Actually at least 5.11.1 declarative integration failure is timeout in qtbase
-> Linux QEMU (gcc-armv7) build. So the failure is different there (in case it
helps anything)
br,
Jani
From: Development on
behalf of Simon Hausmann
Sent: Thursday, June 14,
Hi,
Thank you Liang for the report.
On top of that, qtdeclarative is not accepting any changes in the 5.9, 5.11,
5.11.1 and dev branches right now.
Those who may have tried staging changes there may have noticed that they are
failing in one of the tests that launch a separate process for t
Integrations
* qt5 dev integration failed from June 2, a submodule update without
qtdeclarative was done on June. 9
* * Issue: https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-68666
declarative_core::MappingManagerError::test_error() failed
* * * https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/222768 Simon is workin
13 matches
Mail list logo
