Don't forget Qt Win Extras
On Tuesday, February 26, 2013, Thomas McGuire wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Monday 25 February 2013 17:11:53 Pasion Jerome wrote:
> > > > I would like to start the feature freeze Qt 5.1 middle of March. [..]
> > > >
> > > > Quite a bit of new functionality has made it into the de
Hi,
On Monday 25 February 2013 17:11:53 Pasion Jerome wrote:
> > > I would like to start the feature freeze Qt 5.1 middle of March. [..]
> > >
> > > Quite a bit of new functionality has made it into the dev branch, but
> > > I'd also like to add a few of the modules left out in 5.0 to the
> > > r
g
Emne: Re: [Development] Qt 5.1 feature set and freeze date
Hi,
On Wednesday 13 February 2013 09:49:56 Knoll Lars wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I would like to start the feature freeze Qt 5.1 middle of March. This is a
> bit later then I originally proposed in December. There's two reaso
Hi,
On Wednesday 13 February 2013 09:49:56 Knoll Lars wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I would like to start the feature freeze Qt 5.1 middle of March. This is a
> bit later then I originally proposed in December. There's two reasons for
> this. First of all it'll reduce some of the integration pressur
On Wednesday 13 February 2013 08:49:56 Knoll Lars wrote:
> * Friday 22. February: If you have a larger feature/feature branch (not
> yet merged) that you want to have in the release you must have told the
> release team (by mail to releases@) by then.
QLockFile is almost ready, I've been revising
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Ivan Vizir wrote:
> I thought I could finish module following Qt module guidelines and then
> propose it for review, but if you want to see Qt Windows Extras as a part
> of Qt 5.1, we could move it to Qt Playground and work on it together.
>
Lars has just created
On 14 February 2013 19:21, Lorn Potter wrote:
> Back long ago
> https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-71
> (feel free to assign that one to yourself!)
> :)
Will do :-)
> I was working on porting qtopia's timezone class to qt.
> I added full windows <> olsen conversion. It was able to
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 09:42:05PM +1000, Joseph Crowell wrote:
> On 02/14/2013 05:58 AM, André Pönitz wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:08:31AM +0100, Friedemann Kleint wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> we also plan to start Qt Windows Extras to bring at least the missing
> >> image conversion functi
On 14/02/13 04:37, John Layt wrote:
> On 13 February 2013 15:13, Koehne Kai wrote:
>
>> Which parts of the ICU data are you using (from
>> http://apps.icu-project.org/datacustom/ ) ?
>> I'd really like us to strip down the default ICU libs on windows for 5.1 ...
>
> Good question. I think the f
I would certainly like to see that contributed to playground so that all
interested parties may contribute. Any timeframe on when someone can get the
repository created?
Jake Petroules
Petroules Corporation (www.petroules.com)
Email: jake.petrou...@petroules.com
Telephone: +1 (970) 587-3821
On
On 02/14/2013 12:11 PM, Poenitz Andre wrote:
> Rodal Samuel wrote:
>> On 02/14/2013 10:39 AM, Poenitz Andre wrote:
>>> Samuel Rødal wrote:
What use is a QPlatformPixmapHandle having per-platform typedefs
(xcb_pixmap_t, HDC, etc) without #ifdefs to manipulate it using native
code in t
On 02/14/2013 05:58 AM, André Pönitz wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:08:31AM +0100, Friedemann Kleint wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> we also plan to start Qt Windows Extras to bring at least the missing
>> image conversion functions ( QTBUG-27103 ) back provided we can find
>> someone to create the repos
Rodal Samuel wrote:
>On 02/14/2013 10:39 AM, Poenitz Andre wrote:
>> Samuel Rødal wrote:
>>> What use is a QPlatformPixmapHandle having per-platform typedefs
>>> (xcb_pixmap_t, HDC, etc) without #ifdefs to manipulate it using native
>>> code in the first place?
>>>
>>> Can you give a platform-indep
On 02/14/2013 10:39 AM, Poenitz Andre wrote:
> Samuel Rødal wrote:
>> What use is a QPlatformPixmapHandle having per-platform typedefs
>> (xcb_pixmap_t, HDC, etc) without #ifdefs to manipulate it using native
>> code in the first place?
>>
>> Can you give a platform-independent example use case? :)
> Since the Window frame in Windows is owned by the application, how about the possibility of customising the appearance of the Window frame? Or being able to catch the window events associated with window frames like minimize, maximize clicks so I would write my own cusom window frames. Just forg
Samuel Rødal wrote:
> What use is a QPlatformPixmapHandle having per-platform typedefs
> (xcb_pixmap_t, HDC, etc) without #ifdefs to manipulate it using native
> code in the first place?
>
> Can you give a platform-independent example use case? :)
It helps reducing the amount of user code within
On 02/14/2013 05:58 PM, Ivan Vizir wrote:
Hello,
There're no problems with Qt Windows Extras. As I said somewhen in
January, I plan to contribute to Qt my code, when it's done. Current
results you can see at http://github.com/dtf/QtWindowsExtras .
For now features what are ready are:
--- progr
On 02/13/2013 08:58 PM, André Pönitz wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:08:31AM +0100, Friedemann Kleint wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> we also plan to start Qt Windows Extras to bring at least the missing
>> image conversion functions ( QTBUG-27103 ) back provided we can find
>> someone to create the repos
Hello, There're no problems with Qt Windows Extras. As I said somewhen in January, I plan to contribute to Qt my code, when it's done. Current results you can see at http://github.com/dtf/QtWindowsExtras . For now features what are ready are:— progress bar indicator;— overlay icons;— thumbnails fo
Op 13-2-2013 18:24, Jake Petroules schreef:
QtWindowsExtras is something I plan to contribute to heavily. What
things would folks like to see in there besides the image conversion
functions? I suggested Windows 7 task bar features a little while
back, and I believe that there is a Windows count
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:08:31AM +0100, Friedemann Kleint wrote:
> Hi,
>
> we also plan to start Qt Windows Extras to bring at least the missing
> image conversion functions ( QTBUG-27103 ) back provided we can find
> someone to create the repository ;-) .
I think the approach of per-platfor
On 13 February 2013 18:37, John Layt wrote:
> supplementalData.res
> timezoneTypes.res
> windowsZones.res
> zone/*.res
Oh, also looks like:
metaZones.res
zoneinfo64.res
I wish ICU wrote better documentation :-)
John.
___
Develo
On 13 February 2013 15:13, Koehne Kai wrote:
> Which parts of the ICU data are you using (from
> http://apps.icu-project.org/datacustom/ ) ?
> I'd really like us to strip down the default ICU libs on windows for 5.1 ...
Good question. I think the following under "Miscellaneous Data" would cov
QtWindowsExtras is something I plan to contribute to heavily. What things
would folks like to see in there besides the image conversion functions? I
suggested Windows 7 task bar features a little while back, and I believe
that there is a Windows counterpart to QMacPasteboardMime that needs
replacin
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Knoll Lars wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I would like to start the feature freeze Qt 5.1 middle of March. This is a
> bit later then I originally proposed in December. There's two reasons for
> this. First of all it'll reduce some of the integration pressure for the
>
Re: [Development] Qt 5.1 feature set and freeze date
>
> [...]
> My work branch is at [1] if anyone's interested. It has ICU, Windows and Mac
> support done, basic integration into QDateTime, and TZ file support soon to
> follow.
Hi John,
Which parts of the ICU data are you
Sean sayeth:
>
>
I also was disappointed that Qt3D would not make it into Qt5.1, but IMHO
the details Sean (and James Turner) provided are quite excellent -- there's
a lot there, and it makes sense to provide this "think-it-through" for the
APIs.
Nobody wants to rewrite their 3D to a new API
On 02/13/2013 12:49 PM, Knoll Lars wrote:
> * Friday 22. February: If you have a larger feature/feature branch (not
> yet merged) that you want to have in the release you must have told the
> release team (by mail to releases@) by then.
I'd like to have the X11 Embedding in 5.1:
https://codere
On Wednesday 13 February 2013 08:49:56 Knoll Lars wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I would like to start the feature freeze Qt 5.1 middle of March. This is a
> bit later then I originally proposed in December. There's two reasons for
> this. First of all it'll reduce some of the integration pressure for
On Wednesday 13 February 2013 08:59:39 Knoll Lars wrote:
> On 2/13/13 9:54 AM, "Mülner, Helmut" wrote:
> >> [...]
> >> Quite a bit of new functionality has made it into the dev branch, but
> >>
> >>I'd also
> >>
> >> like to add a few of the modules left out in 5.0 to the release. The
> >>
> >>can
On Wednesday 13 Feb 2013 08:49:56 Knoll Lars wrote:
>
> The detailed timeline will be as follows:
>
> * Friday 22. February: If you have a larger feature/feature branch (not
> yet merged) that you want to have in the release you must have told the
> release team (by mail to releases@) by then.
>
On 2/13/13 10:58 AM, "Shaw Andy" wrote:
>[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 cha
[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
See the "OpenGL in Qt 5.1 and onwards" thread for details for instance.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Дмитрий Волосных <
dmitry.volosn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would also like to hear more about the Qt3D module from Sean. What
> is future plans, etc.
>
> Regards,
> Dmitrii.
> _
I would also like to hear more about the Qt3D module from Sean. What
is future plans, etc.
Regards,
Dmitrii.
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Hi Sean,
>
> On Wednesday 13 February 2013 10:06:41 Mülner, Helmut wrote:
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > >No Qt3D? :-(
> > >
> > > No, unfortunately not.
> > >
> > > We've gone through it, and it will require some more work to make it
> > > suitable for inclusion. Sean can give details on it. But you ca
Hi,
On Wednesday 13 February 2013 10:06:41 Mülner, Helmut wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> > >No Qt3D? :-(
> >
> > No, unfortunately not.
> >
> > We've gone through it, and it will require some more work to make it
> > suitable for inclusion. Sean can give details on it. But you can continue
> > to use
On 2/13/13 10:08 AM, "Friedemann Kleint"
wrote:
>Hi,
>
>we also plan to start Qt Windows Extras to bring at least the missing
>image conversion functions ( QTBUG-27103 ) back provided we can find
>someone to create the repository ;-) .
Ok. Sergio can hopefully help with the repo. Do you think
Hi,
we also plan to start Qt Windows Extras to bring at least the missing
image conversion functions ( QTBUG-27103 ) back provided we can find
someone to create the repository ;-) .
Friedemann
--
Friedemann Kleint
Digia, Qt
___
Development mailing
> [...]
> >No Qt3D? :-(
>
> No, unfortunately not.
>
> We've gone through it, and it will require some more work to make it suitable
> for inclusion. Sean can give details on it. But you can continue to use the
> module as is (knowing the APIs will still change slightly).
>
Unfortunately I can
On 2/13/13 9:54 AM, "Mülner, Helmut" wrote:
>> [...]
>> Quite a bit of new functionality has made it into the dev branch, but
>>I'd also
>> like to add a few of the modules left out in 5.0 to the release. The
>>candidates
>> I can see so far are:
>>
>> * Qt X11 Extras
>> * Qt Mac Extras
>> * Qt
> [...]
> Quite a bit of new functionality has made it into the dev branch, but I'd also
> like to add a few of the modules left out in 5.0 to the release. The
> candidates
> I can see so far are:
>
> * Qt X11 Extras
> * Qt Mac Extras
> * Qt Sensors
> * Qt Serial Port
> * Qt Quick Controls (forme
Hi everybody,
I would like to start the feature freeze Qt 5.1 middle of March. This is a
bit later then I originally proposed in December. There's two reasons for
this. First of all it'll reduce some of the integration pressure for the
Android ports as well as the Qt Quick Controls. Secondly, the
43 matches
Mail list logo
