Review request: moving libkgoogle to extragear

2012-05-25 Thread Dan Vratil
Hi, LibKGoogle is a new optional dependency of kdepim-runtime. It's used by the new Akonadi Google resources. It's now in kdereview [0] and I'd like to move it to extragear, so I'm asking for a review on the library. Thanks Dan [0] https://projects.kde.org/projects/kdereview/libkgoogle/repos

Review Request: kjs: Implement JSON.stringify

2012-05-25 Thread Bernd Buschinski
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/105057/ --- Review request for kdelibs. Description --- kjs: Implement JSON.strin

Review Request: kjs: Implement JSON.parse

2012-05-25 Thread Bernd Buschinski
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/105056/ --- Review request for kdelibs. Description --- kjs: Implement JSON.parse

Re: QtScript considered dangerous

2012-05-25 Thread Stephen Kelly
Christoph Cullmann wrote: >> On Friday, May 25, 2012 11:14:17 Dominik Haumann wrote: >> > So it's probably non-trivial to create this patch (haven't looked >> > into >> > it, though), a dead end as it's Qt4, and unclear, whether such a >> > patch >> > would be accepted at all in the Qt 4.x line, g

[Announce] Linux Color Management Hackfest 2012

2012-05-25 Thread Kai-Uwe Behrmann
During the recent LGM[1] we started to organise a hackfest[2]. The event aims at bringing developers of the Linux applications and desktops and experts interested in color management (CM) together and support the integration of CM inside their open source projects and distributions. The hackfest

Re: QtScript considered dangerous

2012-05-25 Thread Dominik Haumann
On Friday, 25. May 2012 12:32:07 Martin Sandsmark wrote: > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:03:43PM +0200, Dominik Haumann wrote: > > Right, maybe an increase of the allowed memory would work, or similar > > changes... > > Isn't the problem that the pointer size it uses is too small? As you see, I didn

Re: QtScript considered dangerous

2012-05-25 Thread Aaron J. Seigo
On Friday, May 25, 2012 11:14:17 Dominik Haumann wrote: > On [1], the Kent Hansen says: ime, Kent tends to be focused on the better future rather than the pragmatic present while tending to ignore use cases that his team doesn't have themselves. this can make using things that comes from his tea

Re: QtScript considered dangerous

2012-05-25 Thread Thomas Lübking
2012/5/25, Martin Sandsmark : > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:03:43PM +0200, Dominik Haumann wrote: >> Right, maybe an increase of the allowed memory would work, or similar >> changes... > > Isn't the problem that the pointer size it uses is too small? It likely asserts in the casting comparism. tl;

KDE SC 4.9 Features

2012-05-25 Thread Allen Winter
Howdy, If you have implemented an important new feature to KDE SC 4.9 please remember to add it to the feature list (wiki) at: http://techbase.kde.org/Schedules/KDE4/4.9_Feature_Plan Or, if you already have feature(s) on the list please update the status as appropriate. Do NOT add new features

Re: QtScript considered dangerous

2012-05-25 Thread Martin Sandsmark
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:03:43PM +0200, Dominik Haumann wrote: > Right, maybe an increase of the allowed memory would work, or similar > changes... Isn't the problem that the pointer size it uses is too small? -- Martin Sandsmark

Re: QtScript considered dangerous

2012-05-25 Thread Dominik Haumann
On Friday, May 25, 2012 11:55:08 Christoph Cullmann wrote: > On Friday, May 25, 2012 11:14:17 Dominik Haumann wrote: > > And it's unclear, whether a jsc update would fix the issue, btw :-) > > Still, a fix for QtScript would be the nicest solution or a port to the Right, maybe an increase of the

Re: QtScript considered dangerous

2012-05-25 Thread Christoph Cullmann
> On Friday, May 25, 2012 11:14:17 Dominik Haumann wrote: > > So it's probably non-trivial to create this patch (haven't looked > > into > > it, though), a dead end as it's Qt4, and unclear, whether such a > > patch > > would be accepted at all in the Qt 4.x line, given that the focus > > is > > on

Re: QtScript considered dangerous

2012-05-25 Thread Dominik Haumann
On Friday, May 25, 2012 11:14:17 Dominik Haumann wrote: > So it's probably non-trivial to create this patch (haven't looked into > it, though), a dead end as it's Qt4, and unclear, whether such a patch > would be accepted at all in the Qt 4.x line, given that the focus is > on Qt5 now. And it's un

Re: QtScript considered dangerous

2012-05-25 Thread Dominik Haumann
On Thursday, May 24, 2012 12:57:14 David Faure wrote: > On Thursday 24 May 2012 10:59:21 Dominik Haumann wrote: > > they said they will probably not spent the considerable amount of time > > in updating the archaic jsc checkout used in QtScript. > > What about the solution of updating the JSC in Q