I was creating another bug report earlier today in JIRA and I noticed that it
was assigning to someone who didn't seem to be right for the component at all
since I don't believe they are the maintainer for it and I recalled that this
is not the first time I've noticed that the auto-assigner is c
this is not
happening then please report it as it should be handled correctly in that
instance.
Andy
From: Edward Sutton [mailto:edward.sut...@subsite.com]
Sent: 4. desember 2015 15:07
To: Mark De Wit
Cc: Shaw Andy; development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] Please do not remove
There is QPdfWriter at least which is a paint device, so you could use that for
generating PDFs as that is available iOS from what I can see.
Andy
From: Development [mailto:development-boun...@qt-project.org] On Behalf Of
Edward Sutton
Sent: 3. desember 2015 15:09
To: Mark De Wit
Cc: developmen
I'm unable to do anything more about the issue at least, I was able to pinpoint
the cause but I don't know how to fix it correctly so it is certainly out of my
hands. I'd be happy to help out however I can to getting this fixed though.
Regards,
Andy
From: development-bounces+andy.shaw=theqtcomp
> > > What are the chances that such a change can be accepted ? (i mean, i can
> > > submit such a patch, but that would mean breaking a *lot* of code).
> >
> > QOptional does not exist yet and for very good reasons.
> >
> > QVariant is already in use, so I don't think you'd be sending a patch to u
> As the subject says, ok to do it?
>
> Note that this does *NOT* apply to wince60*-msvc2005 mkspecs.
>
> If there are no objections, we'll do it in one week.
I think it is certainly safe to remove it, it hasn't been supported in a long
time and I doubt it even works.
Andy
> > I am porting an application to Qt5/KF5 and was surprised to see the
> > main widget of the application was showing all black. There are
> > screenshots of the original version and the buggy version[1] online. I
> > removed
> >
> > setAttribute( Qt::WA_PaintOnScreen, true );
> >
> > on that widg
> Em qua 26 mar 2014, às 08:21:20, Alan Ezust escreveu:
> > Does anyone understand what the difference is between a qt that is
> > configured like this: ./configure -developer-build versus a Qt that is
> > configured like this: configure -developer-build --prefix=$PWD/qtbase
> >
> > according to
> Gerrit seems to reject some of my changes with this error:
>
> $ git push ssh://mandri...@codereview.qt-project.org/qt/qt HEAD:refs/for/4.8
> error: error: invalid protocol: wanted 'old new ref'
> fatal: internal server error
> fatal: The remote end hung up unexpectedly
> Counting obje
> Em ter 11 mar 2014, às 17:17:46, Andre Somers escreveu:
> > I seriously don't see the benefit of this "harmonization". When I look
> > at the docs for a class, I often just look for method names that seem to
> > do what I need. That usually works very with Qt. Now, I will need to go
> > check for
I was informed earlier in the week that it was known and being investigated,
there was a problem with the Mac OS X 10.6 machine but I was also under the
impression that it would be fixed already by now so I don't know what is
happening with it at the moment.
Andy
From: development-bounces+andy
> The following functions/types need documenting. (This list excludes
> constructors, destructors, and operators). Could those who are
[snip]
How was this list created? Because it seems that although some are actually
missing it also contains ones that aren't, e.g. QSqlTableModel::record().
And
> > I was looking at a problem regarding deferred deletes causing a crash inside
> > nested loops and it was pointed out that in
> > QCoreApplication::setPostedEvents() there is some code there that
> > determines whether it is safe to delete the object or not. From my
> > understanding it will onl
Hi,
I was looking at a problem regarding deferred deletes causing a crash inside
nested loops and it was pointed out that in QCoreApplication::setPostedEvents()
there is some code there that determines whether it is safe to delete the
object or not. From my understanding it will only delete an
> * Keep the patches switching to the new platform plugin code in reserve to
> either switch for 5.3 if testing proves the plugin is stable enough, or more
> likely to use in 5.4 if not.
I like this idea at least, because this enables the reviews to keep going and
we can keep testing until we are
> > >I’ve now gone through all changes. The set looks pretty good overall, and
> > >testing on Linux showed no regressions compared to 5.2.
> >
> > One correction here: The paperRect as shown in the preview of the dialogs
> > manual test shows some slightly different results, that look like a
> > r
> >I’ve now gone through all changes. The set looks pretty good overall, and
> >testing on Linux showed no regressions compared to 5.2.
>
> One correction here: The paperRect as shown in the preview of the dialogs
> manual test shows some slightly different results, that look like a
> rounding iss
> FWIW, Browser stats fun:
> Bar chart last 30 days:
> http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-monthly-201312-201312-bar
> (Windows XP still has 18.52%)
>
> Trend chart:
> http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-monthly-200808-201311
> Of course - it's declining. The decline seems actually to flatten out.
>
>
IIRC it wasn't even compiled into the QtWidgets library, although the
documentation and everything existed, those symbols were never in Qt. Morten
can say 100% at least but that is my understanding and recollection at least.
Andy
From: development-bounces+andy.shaw=digia@qt-project.org
[ma
> I looked into the desired workflow changes for Jira (as discussed on this
> list)
> and am doing some general cleanups which I would like to bring up at this
> point. The more invasive bulk changes will happen on Monday while others
> have already happened. Please note that this may temporarily
generally more safer
time. As such now the merge from stable to release as to wait because of the CI
trouble, which puts more pressure on the actual schedule.
Andy
From: Sarajärvi Tony
Sent: 22. mai 2013 11:45
To: Shaw Andy; development@qt-project.org
Subject: RE: Builds failing due to android host
That doesn't make it a valid thing to still do, testing or not. I am not sure
what others think but do we want to still do upgrades to things on CI this late
into a release process?
Andy
From: Sarajärvi Tony
Sent: 22. mai 2013 10:54
To: Shaw Andy; development@qt-project.org
Subject: RE: B
Maybe I missed something, but why are upgrades like this being done in the
middle of a release cycle? With Qt 5.1 final due in not too long then shouldn't
these kind of upgrades wait until after the final release in order to avoid
this sort of thing being a problem for the release?
Andy
From:
I know the background for this pretty well since I was involved with the
original transfer of the solution code from TT to Nokia. Basically the code was
not transferred to Digia at all and it was not initially made publically
available either when the code was released under the BSD license when
> The file dialog takes up to 30 seconds to be usable if we're listing
> files on a USB or remote share with 10k files.
>
>
> The bottlenecks are QFileIconProvider::icon(const QFileInfo &info) and
> QFileInfo::isSymLink().
>
>
> I solved the icon problem by looking them up in the registry, by
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 11:31:17AM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > Can we please agree on cleaning the dashboards up? Or, if we've
> > agreed, can we do it?
> >
> i think there was "consensus" to do it.
> however, it depends on
> https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTQAINFRA-598 to find
>
> Making of Qt 5.1 minor release will soon start:
>
> - Plan is to move 'dev' into 'stable' branch on March 19th.
>
> - After March 19th any changes that are required to get in for 5.1
> need to be pushed into 'stable' branch. So if your needed changes don't
> make it today,
> please wait aft
I would expect that the workflow is that if a report is set to be "In progress"
then this is the indication that someone is actually working on the report, if
we start using the assigner for this indication then it sounds like it will
complicate matters even further. Also, if a P1 is created and
> Before the transition to Qt being developed in the open via open governance,
> the Qt Support team back in Trolltech and later Nokia, would prioritize the
> bugs that were created, or at least handled, by them. Typically these would
> be bugs that were brought to our attention by commercial custo
> Merge from stable to release branch is now done.
> Changes that are intended to get in for Qt 5.0.2 need to be pushed into
> release branch.
Now that the merge has done, doesn't this in effect mean that stable is now in
reality Qt 5.1.0 based as dev will be merged to stable on 15th March? If th
[snip]
> > What I would like to suggest that we do now is bring back this practice, so
> that the Qt Support team will set a priority on the bugs that it creates or
> handles, so that it makes things easier for the maintainers to actually see
> what issues are potentially a higher priority than th
Hi,
Before the transition to Qt being developed in the open via open governance,
the Qt Support team back in Trolltech and later Nokia, would prioritize the
bugs that were created, or at least handled, by them. Typically these would be
bugs that were brought to our attention by commercial custo
[snip]
> * Friday 15. March: Feature freeze. Merge from dev to stable.
What will happen to Qt 5.0.x at this point, does it mean we do not plan to do
any further 5.0.x releases after Qt 5.1.0 is out in April? Or will we have a
5.0 branch for the changes that simply have to be done in 5.0.x, for
> Op 30-1-2013 19:34, Robin Burchell schreef:
> > On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Sergio Ahumada
> > wrote:
> >> How many changes do you need to close a jira task ? one, two, more, who
> >> knows ?
> > The person submitting the change.
> >
> > The way I've seen this done various other places is t
> 5.0 is out and the 5.1 feature freeze isn't that far off any more.
> seems like the best time for some serious house cleaning.
> therefore i'd like to urge everyone to give their pending changes which
> haven't seen activity for a long time a honest look.
> please explicitly mark the ones you st
> On Tuesday, January 22, 2013 11:40:23 AM Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 08:14:03AM -0800, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > > On segunda-feira, 21 de janeiro de 2013 15.33.59, Knoll Lars wrote:
> > > > Finally reading up on some old emails…
> > > >
> > > > I'd say we add the virtu
> On 17/01/13 14:51, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
> > http://doc-snapshot.qt-project.org/4.8/qsettings.html is instead
> > recreated nightly or so, so you'll see the note added in that commit.
>
> Aha! Ok... How should one know that the docs on
> http://qt-project.org/doc/qt-4.8/ are from 4.8.4? In th
ment] ICU and Windows
>
> On segunda-feira, 14 de janeiro de 2013 13.02.46, Shaw Andy wrote:
> > Therefore I would like to propose that for 5.0.1 we simply modify the pro
> > file so that it expects a d after the library name for the debug version
> > and the release one
To get things back on track, I think we have a case for either way saying that
we could ignore it as since as long as it's done the correct way then it should
be fine. But there is also a case for doing the right thing as far as what is
recommended by Microsoft in this case especially since we
> [...]
>
> > Microsoft in the past has also said that you should keep the -MD(d)/-MT(d)
> > setting consistent so it is the same across all libraries and applications,
>
> [...]
>
> Which is cool, if you can manage it. But it's far from what happens in the
> real world.
>
> In the real world y
> I'm no expert on the various build and link issues, but in trying to write the
> new ICU backend for QLocale which would make ICU a hard requirement in
> the
> future I've started running into problems which may affect your choice of
> solution.
>
> For those interested, I have working code for
> On sexta-feira, 11 de janeiro de 2013 13.32.35, Shaw Andy wrote:
> > Unfortunately this is what is happening now if ICU is linked in, ICU will
> > always use the release version so if Qt is built in debug mode then it will
> > end up mixing the C runtime libraries.
>
As I was investigating a different problem I came across a bigger issue
regarding ICU on Windows. The problem is that when ICU is linked against on
Windows it links against the same copy of the library even if it is building
for release which causes a problem with C runtime libraries on Windows
> -Original Message-
> From: development-bounces+andy.shaw=digia@qt-project.org
> [mailto:development-bounces+andy.shaw=digia@qt-project.org] On
> Behalf Of Marc Mutz
> Sent: 9. desember 2012 14:23
> To: development@qt-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Development] RFC: What constitutes
> When I was doing the lib renaming, I thought we had concluded that
> frameworks
> on Mac were not going to be supported anymore.
>
> Imagine my surprise when I finish my first successful build on Mac and
> discover
> that frameworks are the default...
>
> I guess we should change, right? I'm no
> looks like there's quite some discussion about Thiago's proposal. Let's see if
> we can get at least agreement on most of the changes and then focus on the
> parts that are controversial.
>
> Going through the list below, most of the changes will not affect anybody in a
> big way.
>
>
> On Oct
> On Oct 15, 2012, at 9:39 AM, Mark Brand
> wrote:
>
> > João Abecasis wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I'd like to nominate Andy Shaw for Approver status. Andy's history
> >> with Qt is longer than my own, having catered to commercial customers
> >> in Trolltech, Nokia and Digia. Looking over the main
> -Original Message-
> From: Stephen Chu [mailto:step...@ju-ju.com]
> Sent: 26. september 2012 15:55
> To: Shaw Andy
> Cc: Иван Комиссаров; Konstantin Tokarev; development
> Subject: Re: [Development] What's with bugreports.qt-project.org?
>
> On 9/26/12 6:
> 26.09.2012, в 14:15, Konstantin Tokarev написал(а):
>
> 26.09.2012, 11:09, "Иван Комиссаров" :
> >> I would like to ask a question - what's with Qt Jira? Does any people
> >> really
> look at it and fix bugs? For the past 2 years, situation get worse and worse -
> 3-4 years ago bugs were fix
> On 10 September 2012 12:58, Shaw Andy wrote:
>
> > To clarify, I did the patch that everyone is referring to, I actually did
> > it in my
> Nokia days when I had access to the tablet and passed it on to someone after
> I joined Digia. It is a hack because I had t
> On domingo, 9 de setembro de 2012 13.25.29, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> > The solution for a bug can never be to wilfully break existing applications!
> > What can I as an application developer depend on if that's deemed
> > acceptable? "Yeah, we had a feature, and yeah, people depend on it, but
> w
[snip]
> >The warning needs to go away, at least, provided that Qt *is* tested on
> >Windows 8. Whether we add the enum or not, that's a bit orthogonal.
>
> Yes, the warning needs to be fixed.
>
> But I don't have any problems with adding the new enum in a patch level
> release. The only thing i
On 2/22/12 9:48 PM, "Thiago Macieira" wrote:
>On quarta-feira, 22 de fevereiro de 2012 17.11.17, lars.kn...@nokia.com
>wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> this is the first mail where I'd like to go through the remaining
>>features
>> for Qt 5.0.
>>
>> I know that this bug is blocked by not having PCRE in 3r
On 1/19/12 4:15 AM, "Thiago Macieira" wrote:
>On Wednesday, 18 de January de 2012 21.24.36, Shaw Andy wrote:
>> For what it is worth I also agree that it should be changed, having
>> recently having to deal with the QDoubleValidator problem when it came
>>to
On 1/18/12 2:21 PM, "lars.kn...@nokia.com" wrote:
>>
>>We need to avoid the problem of printf / scanf that use different decimal
>>conventions depending on the user locale. That means the naive
>>implementation
>>will be unable to parse the data it generated under a different locale
>>settings.
On 12/16/11 1:18 PM, "Olivier Goffart" wrote:
>On Friday 16 December 2011 12:48:32 Thiago Macieira wrote:
>> On Friday, 16 de December de 2011 11.07.03, Sergio Ahumada wrote:
>> > One idea is to have an automated process that propose the changes to
>> > be merged from Qt 4.(x-1) to Qt 4.x in Ge
56 matches
Mail list logo
