On Aug 16, 2012, at 11:29 AM, ext Stephen Kelly wrote:
> On Thursday, August 16, 2012 10:53:53 R. Reucher wrote:
>>> Well, we can start by listing what's missing. I'm not sure everyone
>>> involved even knows of these features lacking.
>>
>> The missing classes I'm talking about here are:
>>
>>
On Thursday, August 16, 2012 10:53:53 R. Reucher wrote:
> > Well, we can start by listing what's missing. I'm not sure everyone
> > involved even knows of these features lacking.
>
> The missing classes I'm talking about here are:
>
> - QX11EmbedContainer
> - QX11EmbedWidget
> - QX11Info
https:/
On Thursday 16 August 2012 10:47:18 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On quinta-feira, 16 de agosto de 2012 10.42.12, R. Reucher wrote:
> > I agree mostly, but don't forget the functionality / APIs (i.e. the X11
> > ones) that have been dropped for no apparent reason. I know that they
> > will sooner or la
On quinta-feira, 16 de agosto de 2012 10.42.12, R. Reucher wrote:
> I agree mostly, but don't forget the functionality / APIs (i.e. the X11
> ones) that have been dropped for no apparent reason. I know that they will
> sooner or later probably be part of Qt 5 again, mainly depending on
> community
On Wednesday 15 August 2012 22:52:48 Turunen Tuukka wrote:
> Qt 5.0 offers many great new things as well as good level of compatibility
> with Qt 4.
I agree mostly, but don't forget the functionality / APIs (i.e. the X11 ones)
that have been dropped for no apparent reason. I know that they will so
On 15.08.2012 21:35, Romain Pokrzywka wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 15, 2012 08:36:35 PM Thiago Macieira wrote:
>> On quarta-feira, 15 de agosto de 2012 22.05.02, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
>>> From wiki:
>>>
>>> "QPA on Qt4.8 only makes sense on OpenGL Hardware! If you don�t have
>>> OpenGL
>>> HW
On Aug 15, 2012, at 10:52 PM, ext Turunen Tuukka
wrote:
>
> On 15.8.2012 19.30, "Thiago Macieira" wrote:
>
>> - we simply cannot detract from the 5.0 effort right now. All resources
>> need
>> to be there, except for 4.8 maintenance.
>
> +1
>
> We are planning to make new 4.8.x patch rele
On 15.8.2012 19.30, "Thiago Macieira" wrote:
> - we simply cannot detract from the 5.0 effort right now. All resources
>need
>to be there, except for 4.8 maintenance.
+1
We are planning to make new 4.8.x patch releases still and fully agree
that Qt 4 is a very important platform. Next patch r
On Wednesday, August 15, 2012 08:36:35 PM Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On quarta-feira, 15 de agosto de 2012 22.05.02, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
> > From wiki:
> >
> > "QPA on Qt4.8 only makes sense on OpenGL Hardware! If you don?t have
> > OpenGL
> > HW there is absolutely no point in choosing Qt4.8-
On quarta-feira, 15 de agosto de 2012 22.05.02, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
> From wiki:
>
> "QPA on Qt4.8 only makes sense on OpenGL Hardware! If you don’t have OpenGL
> HW there is absolutely no point in choosing Qt4.8-QPA over Qt4.8-QWS"
The wiki is wrong.
There's a lot of reason for choosing QP
15.08.2012, 20:47, "Thiago Macieira" :
> On quarta-feira, 15 de agosto de 2012 19.36.16, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
>
>> 2. No QWS in Qt 5.
>>
>> Porting of QWS-based embedded application requires more effort for porting.
>> For example, in Smartlabs we are using custom graphics plugins for har
On quarta-feira, 15 de agosto de 2012 19.36.16, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
> 2. No QWS in Qt 5.
>
> Porting of QWS-based embedded application requires more effort for porting.
> For example, in Smartlabs we are using custom graphics plugins for hardware
> we are targeting, and our code depends heavi
On quarta-feira, 15 de agosto de 2012 19.36.16, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
> I think it's high time for Qt 4.9 to be released.
I have my opinion on the existence of a 4.9, but I'll keep it for the moment.
But I want to make sure we understand this:
*IF* we do a 4.9, it needs to be released *AFTER
>
> +1 for QJson stuff. It's a format that is commonly used when parsing
> result from an API call.
> There is already a QJson project here: http://qjson.sourceforge.net/
> maybe we could use this code as starting point? License is LGPL.
I do not have a strong opinion about the 4.9 release idea a
15.08.2012, 19:43, "a.gra...@gmail.com" :
> Hi,
>
> On 15 August 2012 18:36, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
>
>> Personally I'd like to port next features into Qt 4:
>> * QJson* stuff
>
> +1 for QJson stuff. It's a format that is commonly used when parsing
> result from an API call.
> There is alre
Hi,
On 15 August 2012 18:36, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
> Personally I'd like to port next features into Qt 4:
> * QJson* stuff
+1 for QJson stuff. It's a format that is commonly used when parsing
result from an API call.
There is already a QJson project here: http://qjson.sourceforge.net/
maybe
Hi all,
Qt 5 has a number of new features, that could be relatively easy backported
into Qt 4
without breaking backward compatibility [1], notably new classes (unrelated to
QPA),
new methods, and new macros.
I think it's high time for Qt 4.9 to be released.
Rationale:
1. Large code bases.
Th
17 matches
Mail list logo
