On Monday 28 October 2024 08:40:25 Pacific Daylight Time Andreas Aardal Hanssen
wrote:
> Man 28 okt 2024 kl. 16:29 skrev Thiago Macieira:
> > Lazy consensus is part of our governance. If no one speaks up with
> > arguments against, it implies no one has arguments against of sufficient
> > interest
On Monday 28 October 2024 08:39:59 Pacific Daylight Time Fabian Kosmale via
Development wrote:
> 1. Ensuring that CI gives us enough test coverage, which I suspect might be
> solvable by configuring Qt to build examples and tests by default still
> with 17.
I'll investigate, but I've never look
On Monday 28 October 2024 00:59:25 Pacific Daylight Time Vladimir Minenko via
Development wrote:
> Hi Thiago,
>
> I would not take the silence as a sign of consent. I rather have the
> impression that there is no sufficient interest in this at the moment.
> Despite this, there are quite a few urg
Hi,
you've explicitly excluded ABI from the discussion ("Let's focus first on the
C++ language, because
the ABI discussion is irrelevant if we don't do this"), and ignoring ABI, I do
indeed see mostly two issues:
1. Ensuring that CI gives us enough test coverage, which I suspect might be
solva
Man 28 okt 2024 kl. 16:29 skrev Thiago Macieira:
> Lazy consensus is part of our governance. If no one speaks up with arguments
> against, it implies no one has arguments against of sufficient interest to
> them
> to voice in the first place. Lack of interest and apathy imply people don't
> c
On Monday 28 October 2024 08:10:42 Pacific Daylight Time Volker Hilsheimer via
Development wrote:
> As long as we can guarantee that the binaries we distribute with this change
> are source- and binary-compatible with what is today released without this
> change, and as long as the other conclusio
> On 28 Oct 2024, at 06:57, Thiago Macieira wrote:
>
> On Friday 18 October 2024 08:36:22 Pacific Daylight Time Thiago Macieira
> wrote:
>> I'm going to assume that silence is consent to "there is no drawback" and
>> will proceed with the implementation.
>
> It's been a week since I posted th
On Friday 18 October 2024 08:36:22 Pacific Daylight Time Thiago Macieira wrote:
> I'm going to assume that silence is consent to "there is no drawback" and
> will proceed with the implementation.
It's been a week since I posted this, so as soon as I find the time to satisfy
the technical reviews,
Hi Gary,
Sorry for the delay, will have a look this week.
Tor Arne
> On Oct 28, 2024, at 08:32, Wang Gary wrote:
>
> Hi again!
>
> The previously mentioned two patches still haven't get any new response:
>
> - https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtbase/+/557906
> - https://codereview.qt-
A big hand for Lars, and a warm +1 for Artem.
From: Development on behalf of Lorn Potter
Sent: Monday, 28 October 2024 00:38
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] Qt Multimedia maintainership
+1
On 23/10/24 17:31, Lars Knoll via Development
Hi Thiago,
I would not take the silence as a sign of consent. I rather have the impression
that there is no sufficient interest in this at the moment. Despite this, there
are quite a few urgent improvements required on the CI. I greatly doubt it will
be possible to have additional configuration
Hi again!
The previously mentioned two patches still haven't get any new response:
- https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtbase/+/557906
- https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtdeclarative/+/557907
I rebased these two patch sets, kindly ask for review and maybe some
related discussions.
T
12 matches
Mail list logo
