On Monday, 27 January 2020 22:37:47 PST Benjamin TERRIER wrote:
> You might have missed the info because it is in the blog post, but not in
> Lars email:
>
> There will be no more open source offline installer.
Thanks, I stand corrected.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Sof
În ziua de marți, 28 ianuarie 2020, la 08:37:47 EET, Benjamin TERRIER a scris:
> Le mar. 28 janv. 2020 à 03:22, Thiago Macieira
>
> a écrit :
> > On segunda-feira, 27 de janeiro de 2020 14:47:46 PST NIkolai Marchenko
> >
> > wrote:
> > > Assuming we have a VM that is restricted to connecting to
Den tis 28 jan. 2020 kl 08:01 skrev Elvis Stansvik :
>
> Den tis 28 jan. 2020 kl 03:19 skrev Thiago Macieira
> :
> >
> > On segunda-feira, 27 de janeiro de 2020 14:48:17 PST Alexander Akulich
> > wrote:
> > > I would expect a significant negative effect on the quality of Qt
> > > shipped in Linux
Den tis 28 jan. 2020 kl 03:19 skrev Thiago Macieira :
>
> On segunda-feira, 27 de janeiro de 2020 14:48:17 PST Alexander Akulich wrote:
> > I would expect a significant negative effect on the quality of Qt
> > shipped in Linux distributions and thus negative effect on the
> > Qt-based applications
Le mar. 28 janv. 2020 à 03:22, Thiago Macieira
a écrit :
> On segunda-feira, 27 de janeiro de 2020 14:47:46 PST NIkolai Marchenko
> wrote:
> > Assuming we have a VM that is restricted to connecting to the internet,
> we
> > previously could dump the installer there and install Qt.
> > Now, we nee
On segunda-feira, 27 de janeiro de 2020 15:16:35 PST Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > All security fixes are made available to everyone, for all Qt versions
> > that they affect, provided it's still a supported Qt version
> > (or it was easy to make the fix).
>
> How will this work
On segunda-feira, 27 de janeiro de 2020 14:30:56 PST Giuseppe D'Angelo via
Development wrote:
> Il 27/01/20 22:52, Thiago Macieira ha scritto:
> > All security fixes are made available to everyone, for all Qt versions
> > that
> > they affect, provided it's still a supported Qt version (or it was
On segunda-feira, 27 de janeiro de 2020 14:47:46 PST NIkolai Marchenko wrote:
> Assuming we have a VM that is restricted to connecting to the internet, we
> previously could dump the installer there and install Qt.
> Now, we need to have an intermediary PC with the same OS to first install
> the bi
On segunda-feira, 27 de janeiro de 2020 14:48:17 PST Alexander Akulich wrote:
> I would expect a significant negative effect on the quality of Qt
> shipped in Linux distributions and thus negative effect on the
> Qt-based applications and Qt reputation.
That is debatable since most Linux distribut
Thiago Macieira wrote:
> All security fixes are made available to everyone, for all Qt versions
> that they affect, provided it's still a supported Qt version
> (or it was easy to make the fix).
How will this work for QtWebEngine? There are a few dozen security fixes at
each QtWebEngine point rel
Alexander Akulich wrote:
> I would expect a significant negative effect on the quality of Qt
> shipped in Linux distributions and thus negative effect on the
> Qt-based applications and Qt reputation.
>
> A maintainer can assume a bit more backporting, but let's have some
> retrospective on the cu
Il 27/01/20 23:15, Cristián Maureira-Fredes ha scritto:
Hello David,
On 1/27/20 11:00 PM, David Edmundson wrote:
All security fixes are made available to everyone, for all Qt versions that
they affect, provided it's still a supported Qt version (or it was easy to
make the fix).
If we could ha
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 00:43, Benjamin TERRIER wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 23:23, Ville Voutilainen
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Correct. Necessary for specific purpose seems to be what article 5
>> requires, and then you get explicit consent for that
>> specific purpose, and GDPR's articles 5 an
I would expect a significant negative effect on the quality of Qt
shipped in Linux distributions and thus negative effect on the
Qt-based applications and Qt reputation.
A maintainer can assume a bit more backporting, but let's have some
retrospective on the current LTS:
Compared to Qt 5.12.2, the
Assuming we have a VM that is restricted to connecting to the internet, we
previously could dump the installer there and install Qt.
Now, we need to have an intermediary PC with the same OS to first install
the binaries via online installer and then copy those binary files to that
first VM.
This i
Il 27/01/20 23:31, Benjamin TERRIER ha scritto:
The wiki states that "5.15 is 'dev' in the Qt 5 series", so my
understanding is that all fixes, even those for the commercial LTS will
need to go through the public 5.15 branch.
The wiki is wrong. Let's please not open the discussion about the st
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 23:23, Ville Voutilainen
wrote:
>
> Correct. Necessary for specific purpose seems to be what article 5
> requires, and then you get explicit consent for that
> specific purpose, and GDPR's articles 5 and 6 are covered (of course
> the rest of article 5's requirements need t
Hi Cristián,
surely, everyone is technically able to cherry-pick and backport bug fixes
into their local Qt versions but not everybody has resources and/or
knowledge to do so.
I personally think this could be an inflection point into forking the Qt 5
"Community Edition", with all binary builds su
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 23:29, Ville Voutilainen
wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 00:17, Cristián Maureira-Fredes
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello David,
> >
> > On 1/27/20 11:00 PM, David Edmundson wrote:
> > >> All security fixes are made available to everyone, for all Qt
> versions that
> > >> they affec
Il 27/01/20 22:52, Thiago Macieira ha scritto:
All security fixes are made available to everyone, for all Qt versions that
they affect, provided it's still a supported Qt version (or it was easy to
make the fix).
I asked before, and got no reply: how, by whom, hosted where?
Thanks,
--
Giuseppe
Den mån 27 jan. 2020 kl 23:16 skrev Cristián Maureira-Fredes
:
>
> Hello David,
>
> On 1/27/20 11:00 PM, David Edmundson wrote:
> >> All security fixes are made available to everyone, for all Qt versions that
> >> they affect, provided it's still a supported Qt version (or it was easy to
> >> make
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 00:17, Cristián Maureira-Fredes
wrote:
>
> Hello David,
>
> On 1/27/20 11:00 PM, David Edmundson wrote:
> >> All security fixes are made available to everyone, for all Qt versions that
> >> they affect, provided it's still a supported Qt version (or it was easy to
> >> make
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 00:04, Benjamin TERRIER wrote:
>> >> I know, but since there's no free right to download binaries, GDPR
>> >> doesn't prevent getting explicit consent before allowing
>> >> a download. Would you like me to give people more ideas? :)
>> > GDPR states that data collection shal
Hello David,
On 1/27/20 11:00 PM, David Edmundson wrote:
>> All security fixes are made available to everyone, for all Qt versions that
>> they affect, provided it's still a supported Qt version (or it was easy to
>> make the fix).
>>
> If we could have that explicitly in writing from TQC, that wo
Lars Knoll wrote:
> One is a change in policy regarding the LTS releases, where the LTS part
> of a release is in the future going to be restricted to commercial
> customers. All bug fixes will (as agreed on the Qt Contributor Summit) go
> into dev first. Backporting bug fixes is something that the
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 22:56, Ville Voutilainen
wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 23:43, Benjamin TERRIER
> wrote:
>
> >> I know, but since there's no free right to download binaries, GDPR
> >> doesn't prevent getting explicit consent before allowing
> >> a download. Would you like me to give peop
> All security fixes are made available to everyone, for all Qt versions that
> they affect, provided it's still a supported Qt version (or it was easy to
> make the fix).
>
If we could have that explicitly in writing from TQC, that would mean a lot.
I can easily envision a situation that affects
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 23:43, Benjamin TERRIER wrote:
>> I know, but since there's no free right to download binaries, GDPR
>> doesn't prevent getting explicit consent before allowing
>> a download. Would you like me to give people more ideas? :)
> GDPR states that data collection shall be "limit
On segunda-feira, 27 de janeiro de 2020 07:26:55 PST NIkolai Marchenko wrote:
> > they will be available 12 months after their commercial release
>
> That's 12 months for cybercriminals to exploit already fixed
> vulnerabilities in open source distros...
All security fixes are made available to e
What will happen to Qt for Python? As for now, its binaries can be just
downloaded using pip (a Python package manager). Will it change as well?
Cheers
Dmitriy
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 3:35 PM Lars Knoll wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The Qt Company has done some adjustments to the Qt will be offered in t
On segunda-feira, 27 de janeiro de 2020 10:39:44 PST Elvis Stansvik wrote:
> So? I have an account because I want to contribute. Does not mean I
> want to log in to download (especially not from CI).
The CI aspect is actually pretty relevant. Aside from Appveyor, most other CI
systems with Window
On segunda-feira, 27 de janeiro de 2020 08:36:58 PST NIkolai Marchenko wrote:
> Now every machine that needs qt libraries needs to be connected to the
> internet if it doesn't pay. No expections.
> This is a completely ridiculous bullshit move.
Sorry, Nikolai, but WTF are you talking about?
What
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 22:35, Ville Voutilainen
wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 23:12, André Somers wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 27/01/2020 22:07, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> > > On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 21:56, Dmitriy Purgin
> wrote:
> > >> By the way, gathering emails by requiring an account to downloa
On segunda-feira, 27 de janeiro de 2020 08:23:56 PST NIkolai Marchenko wrote:
> But there will likely be changes to the desire of people to develop.
> Imagine an opensource contributor making a security fix who knows other
> opensource users on older branches aren't going to receive it and there is
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 23:12, André Somers wrote:
>
>
> On 27/01/2020 22:07, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 21:56, Dmitriy Purgin wrote:
> >> By the way, gathering emails by requiring an account to download the
> >> software without any technical reason might be indeed an ex
I am not a lawyer too, but in this case, if I download Qt for personal
reasons (hobby projects) I act as a natural person, and The Qt Company
gathers my email address, and this is personal information. Of course, I
consent to this specifically but the thing is, I have to consent because
The Qt Comp
Il giorno lun 27 gen 2020 alle ore 22:01 Alexander Akulich <
akulichalexan...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>
> You already made life harder by licensing Qt under GPL v3. Of course,
> it has pros and cons, but let's jump to the consequence: we have
> Sailfish OS out of the boat. The OS could have a moder
On 27/01/2020 22:07, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 21:56, Dmitriy Purgin wrote:
By the way, gathering emails by requiring an account to download the software
without any technical reason might be indeed an example of a GDPR violation.
I am not a lawyer, but I am unaware of
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 21:56, Dmitriy Purgin wrote:
>
> By the way, gathering emails by requiring an account to download the software
> without any technical reason might be indeed an example of a GDPR violation.
I am not a lawyer, but I am unaware of any free software license that
gives you a r
Your decision is not a reason to contribute more. It is going to hurt
the ecosystem because it makes it harder to get new developers and
users.
In some of my previous companies, we had a long release cycle so as a
Linux developer I could justify my paid time spent on upstreaming a
fix to get it in
By the way, gathering emails by requiring an account to download the
software without any technical reason might be indeed an example of a GDPR
violation.
Cheers
Dmitriy
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 7:36 PM Frederik Schwarzer
wrote:
> Am 27.01.2020 15:34 schrieb Lars Knoll:
>
> Hi,
>
> > The second
I had fixed this prior to 5.13 but the patch was never accepted:
https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtbase/+/188493
https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-58329
https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/
home:thiagomacieira:branches:openSUSE:Factory/libqt5-qtbase/0001-HighDpi-Fix-
handling-of
Il 27/01/20 19:28, Tuukka Turunen ha scritto:
I do not know why the link does not work. But I remember that post very
well.
[snip]
I wasn't commenting on the merits of the new decision, but on the choice
of hiding a blog post that was perfectly visible until a few hours ago.
My 2 c,
--
Gius
27.01.2020, 21:30, "Tuukka Turunen" :
> Hi,
>
> I do not know why the link does not work. But I remember that post very well.
>
> On hindsight, it was too much of a rush back then to ask everyone to create a
> Qt account immediately.
>
> As I wrote in my earlier reply, situation is different now
Den mån 27 jan. 2020 kl 19:30 skrev Tuukka Turunen :
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I do not know why the link does not work. But I remember that post very well.
>
> On hindsight, it was too much of a rush back then to ask everyone to create a
> Qt account immediately.
>
> As I wrote in my earlier reply, situation
Am 27.01.2020 15:34 schrieb Lars Knoll:
Hi,
The second change is that a Qt Account will be in the future required
for binary packages.
We (as an embedded software company) depend a lot on commercial hardware
with the software tools that are provided by the hardware vendors. The
most annoyin
Hi,
I do not know why the link does not work. But I remember that post very well.
On hindsight, it was too much of a rush back then to ask everyone to create a
Qt account immediately.
As I wrote in my earlier reply, situation is different now:
* Most users have already Qt account
* Ma
Den mån 27 jan. 2020 kl 19:12 skrev Giuseppe D'Angelo via Development
:
>
> Il 27/01/20 16:57, Benjamin TERRIER ha scritto:
>
> We do hope that this eases your concerns, and that we can continue with your
> trust.
>
>
> https://www.qt.io/blog/2015/05/06/changing-qt-account-to-be-optional-in-the-on
Il 27/01/20 16:57, Benjamin TERRIER ha scritto:
*We do hope that this eases your concerns, and that we can continue
with your trust*.
https://www.qt.io/blog/2015/05/06/changing-qt-account-to-be-optional-in-the-online-installer
That blog post is now removed. The URL is correct, as it's cross
> -Original Message-
> From: Development On Behalf Of
> Konstantin Tokarev
> Sent: Monday, 27 January 2020 17:52
> To: Lars Knoll ; Qt development mailing list
>
> Subject: Re: [Development] Changes to Qt offering
>
>
>
> 27.01.2020, 17:36, "Lars Knoll" mailto:lars.kn...@qt.io>>
Il 27/01/20 18:39, NIkolai Marchenko ha scritto:
Honestly, if we think into the future it looks like compiling qt is too
straightforward and doesn't incentivise commercial licenses enough. So
the next big thing will be to make compiling qt an "evolving experience"
with flags and possible builds
> It is cheaper and faster to make your own offline installer.
Honestly, if we think into the future it looks like compiling qt is too
straightforward and doesn't incentivise commercial licenses enough. So the
next big thing will be to make compiling qt an "evolving experience" with
flags and possi
Literally this whole thing could be: "we're making a cheaper offering for
small teams" and see where it goes. Instead it's one wholesome " you!"
package to the community at large.
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 7:55 PM Florian Bruhin wrote:
> Hey,
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 04:00:48PM +, Tuukk
27.01.2020, 17:36, "Lars Knoll" :
> The second change is that a Qt Account will be in the future required for
> binary packages. Source code will continue to be available as currently. This
> will simplify distribution and integration with the Marketplace. In addition,
> we want open source us
Hey,
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 04:00:48PM +, Tuukka Turunen wrote:
> After the change every release of Qt will look like a non-lts release for
> open-source users. Think of Qt 5.14 as an example. It was released in
> December. Today it received the first patch release. There will be more
> befor
> A: We have had the Qt Account as an option for over 4 years, and during
that time there has been already nearly a million people who have
registered and verified their Qt Account.
And how many of them use these accounts to download qt, eh? I bet you they
only use the acc to login to bugtracker a
I've had a Qt account for years, it doesn't change that I do not want to
use it to download a Qt version.
It is obvious that that in the world that we live today having an account
> for a service is not a blocker for people in general.
>
Qt users are not "people in general", they are software dev
On 27/01/2020 17:25, Simon Hausmann wrote:
The development model where changes go to dev first was indeed a topic
of discussion at the Qt Contributor Summit.
This also means that all security fixes will see the light of day on the
dev branch first, in public, in Gerrit.
Some other remark (and
> and the offline installer will become available to commercial licensees
only
Not to mention "free qt binaries installer" will become a third party thing
like, immediately.
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 7:37 PM Benjamin TERRIER
wrote:
> My understanding of the agreement between The Qt Company and th
> having an account for a service is not a blocker for people in general.
Unless they are on a VM and entering the password for said account is an
absolute annoyance.
Also, I would like to raise a more important change:
> and the offline installer will become available to commercial licensees
onl
My understanding of the agreement between The Qt Company and the KDE Free
Qt Foundation is that if the Qt Company
releases a commercial Qt version without releasing the corresponding
open-source version within 12 months, the ownership of Qt will be
transferred
to the KDE Free Qt Foundation under a
Hi,
Well, quite many things have changed since 2015. One important item is that
almost one million users have already voluntarily created (and verified)
themselves a Qt account.
See the FAQ (linked from the blog post):
“Q: Will requiring the Qt Account drive away all Qt users?
A: We have had
Am 27.01.20 um 17:13 schrieb Bogdan Vatra via Development:
> Hi Lars,
>
> În ziua de luni, 27 ianuarie 2020, la 16:34:44 EET, Lars Knoll a scris:
>> Hi all,
> [...]
>> One is a change in policy regarding the LTS releases, where the LTS part of
>> a release is in the future going to be restricted t
> None of these changes should affect how Qt is being developed. There
won’t be any changes to Open Governance or the open development model.
But there will likely be changes to the desire of people to develop.
Imagine an opensource contributor making a security fix who knows other
opensource user
Hi Lars,
În ziua de luni, 27 ianuarie 2020, la 16:34:44 EET, Lars Knoll a scris:
> Hi all,
[...]
>
> One is a change in policy regarding the LTS releases, where the LTS part of
> a release is in the future going to be restricted to commercial customers.
> All bug fixes will (as agreed on the Qt C
Just this change in general reads: "We're going to annoy and inconvenience
as much users as possible so that they buy our stuff"
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 7:09 PM NIkolai Marchenko
wrote:
> > The second change is that a Qt Account will be in the future required
> for binary packages.
>
> I would l
> The second change is that a Qt Account will be in the future required for
binary packages.
I would like to raise a serious security issue with this change.
Oftentimes, you need qt binaries within a VM. Also, oftentimes, VM is
stubborn and refuses to accept pastes.
This means people will use much
Hi,
In essence the LTS patch release is a selection of bug fixes and security fixes
(including update of 3rd party libraries). The bug fixes and security fixes
will go first to dev and are cherry picked back to release branches.
After the change every release of Qt will look like a non-lts rel
Quoting The Qt Company itslef:
Thanks for your feedback to the new online installer asking for a Qt
> Account signup. We have evaluated the feedback received via the blog,
> various discussion forums, irc and other channels. Based on all these
> comments and discussions with our partners we realiz
> Von: Development Im Auftrag von NIkolai
> Marchenko
> Gesendet: Montag, 27. Januar 2020 16:27
> An: Ville Voutilainen
> Cc: Qt development mailing list
> Betreff: Re: [Development] Changes to Qt offering
>
>> they will be available 12 months after their commercial release
>
> That's 12 mont
+1
On 2020-01-24 10:29, Sona Kurazyan wrote:
Hi,
Previously there were discussions that we need to have a new module
in Qt 6 for the Qt 5 classes that will be no longer maintained in Qt
6.
Here are some candidates to be moved there in Qt 6 (see
https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-80312):
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 17:36, NIkolai Marchenko wrote:
>
> > I expect security fixes
> but that's basically what an LTS is ... isn't it?
An LTS gets rather more than just security fixes; an example of that
is compiler compatibility fixes.
Some of us, including Qt employees, backport bug fixes th
> I expect security fixes
but that's basically what an LTS is ... isn't it?
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 6:33 PM Ville Voutilainen <
ville.voutilai...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 17:27, NIkolai Marchenko
> wrote:
> >
> > > they will be available 12 months after their commercial relea
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 17:27, NIkolai Marchenko wrote:
>
> > they will be available 12 months after their commercial release
>
> That's 12 months for cybercriminals to exploit already fixed vulnerabilities
> in open source distros...
I expect security fixes to be made available to everyone, lic
> they will be available 12 months after their commercial release
That's 12 months for cybercriminals to exploit already fixed
vulnerabilities in open source distros...
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 6:23 PM Ville Voutilainen <
ville.voutilai...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 16:52, corobe
On Mon, 27 Jan 2020 at 16:52, coroberti . wrote:
>
> Dear Lars,
> What about sources of LTS versions? Could they be still available?
As far as I understand things, the KDE Free Qt Foundation agreement
ensures that they will be available
12 months after their commercial release. The blog entry doe
Hi,
The criteria to qualify for the small business / startup is:
- Revenue or funding less than 100.000 USD annually
- Max 5 employees
Yours,
Tuukka
On 27.1.2020, 16.58, "drwho" wrote:
On 2020-01-27 9:34 a.m., Lars Knoll wrote:
> The third change is that The Qt Company will
Hi Ekke,
Currently Qt MQTT is not part of Qt for Device Creator or Application
Development product, see: https://www.qt.io/features
Huge amount of other libraries are included, but unfortunately MQTT is only
available as part of the Qt for Automation.
Yours,
Tuukka
On 27.1.2020,
I hope these changes mean that you'll be able to support mobile properly.
I'm still waiting on a response from you about the future of Qt on mobile.
> Sent: Monday, January 27, 2020 at 9:34 AM
> From: "Lars Knoll"
> To: "Qt development mailing list"
> Subject: [Development] Changes to Qt offer
On 2020-01-27 9:34 a.m., Lars Knoll wrote:
The third change is that The Qt Company will in the future also offer a lower
priced product for small businesses. That small business product is btw not
limited to mobile like the one Digia had some years ago, but covers all of Qt
for Device Creation
El dilluns, 27 de gener de 2020, a les 15:34:44 CET, Lars Knoll va escriure:
> Hi all,
>
> The Qt Company has done some adjustments to the Qt will be offered in the
> future. Please check out https://www.qt.io/blog/qt-offering-changes-2020 .
>
> The change consists of three parts
> None of these
Dear Lars,
What about sources of LTS versions? Could they be still available?
Thanks.
Kind regards,
Robert Iakobashvili
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 4:35 PM Lars Knoll wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> The Qt Company has done some adjustments to the Qt will be offered in the
> futur
I understand the reasoning for this change but it effectively ruins the
spirit of open-source~ness of qt while technically leaving it intact.
Technically
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 5:41 PM NIkolai Marchenko
wrote:
> I am afraid I do not have other words for this model than : absolutely
> disgusting
Am 27.01.20 um 15:34 schrieb Lars Knoll:
...
The third change is that The Qt Company will in the future also offer a lower
priced product for small businesses. That small business product is btw not
limited to mobile like the one Digia had some years ago, but covers all of Qt
for Device Creat
I am afraid I do not have other words for this model than : absolutely
disgusting and a complete dick move. Especially login requirement for
binaries.
I don't even understand how distros are now supposed to keep qt code safe
since constantly pushing qt version up is recipe for problems and there
wi
Hi all,
The Qt Company has done some adjustments to the Qt will be offered in the
future. Please check out https://www.qt.io/blog/qt-offering-changes-2020 .
The change consists of three parts.
One is a change in policy regarding the LTS releases, where the LTS part of a
release is in the fut
Hi,
We have released Qt 5.14.1 today, see https://www.qt.io/blog/qt-5.14.1-released
Thanks to everyone involved!
br,
Jani Heikkinen
Release Manager
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/developmen
On 25/01/20 17:31, Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.) wrote:
Apologies for reviving an old thread, but this just came up in a code review
(https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtremoteobjects/+/287828 if anyone is
curious).
On 12/5/19, 11:56 AM, "Development on behalf of Olivier Goffart"
wrote:
Hi,
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Can we have the XML SAX API in that module too? AIUI, Qt 6 will only include
> the XML stream API and the XML DOM API (the latter being ported from SAX
> to streams as the underlying implementation).
That's right, in Qt 6 we won't use the SAX APIs internally anymore. As
89 matches
Mail list logo
