Re: Review Request 109551: port KPtyProcess to QProcess

2013-03-18 Thread Martin Tobias Holmedahl Sandsmark
> On March 18, 2013, 10:04 p.m., Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > > kpty/tests/kptyprocesstest.cpp, line 193 > > > > > > i don't think eating the sleep is a good idea. i'm sure i added it for > > a reason (in a previo

Re: Review Request 109551: port KPtyProcess to QProcess

2013-03-18 Thread Oswald Buddenhagen
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/109551/#review29478 --- kpty/tests/kptyprocesstest.cpp

Fwd: [CMake] CMake 2.8.11-rc1 ready for testing

2013-03-18 Thread Alexander Neundorf
Hi, the first RC for CMake 2.8.11 has been released. Please give it good testing, it contains lots of changes in the core. Btw. Steveire is this time leading the commit statistics :-) Alex -- Forwarded Message -- Subject: [CMake] CMake 2.8.11-rc1 ready for testing Date: Frida

Re: Review Request 109551: port KPtyProcess to QProcess

2013-03-18 Thread Martin Tobias Holmedahl Sandsmark
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/109551/ --- (Updated March 18, 2013, 7:54 p.m.) Review request for KDE Frameworks, kde

Re: Review Request 109549: port KRun away from KProcess

2013-03-18 Thread Martin Tobias Holmedahl Sandsmark
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/109549/ --- (Updated March 18, 2013, 7:51 p.m.) Status -- This change has been ma

Re: Review Request 109538: port KFileMetaDataReader to QProcess

2013-03-18 Thread Kevin Ottens
> On March 17, 2013, 2:05 p.m., Vishesh Handa wrote: > > But why? KFileMetadataReader and the other KFileMetadataStuff should just > > be marked as deprecated. Why are we porting them? We already have better > > alternatives in the nepomuk-widgets repository. > > Martin Tobias Holmedahl Sandsm

Re: Review Request 109538: port KFileMetaDataReader to QProcess

2013-03-18 Thread Frank Reininghaus
> On March 17, 2013, 2:05 p.m., Vishesh Handa wrote: > > But why? KFileMetadataReader and the other KFileMetadataStuff should just > > be marked as deprecated. Why are we porting them? We already have better > > alternatives in the nepomuk-widgets repository. > > Martin Tobias Holmedahl Sandsm

Re: Review Request 109551: port KPtyProcess to QProcess

2013-03-18 Thread Jan Kundrát
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/109551/#review29432 --- kpty/tests/kptyprocesstest.h

Re: Review Request 109551: port KPtyProcess to QProcess

2013-03-18 Thread Kevin Ottens
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/109551/#review29430 --- kpty/tests/kptyprocesstest.cpp

Re: Review Request 109549: port KRun away from KProcess

2013-03-18 Thread Kevin Ottens
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/109549/#review29429 --- Ship it! Looks good to me provided you fixed the trailing whit

Re: Review Request 109551: port KPtyProcess to QProcess

2013-03-18 Thread Martin Tobias Holmedahl Sandsmark
> On March 18, 2013, 7:25 a.m., Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > > kpty/tests/kptyprocesstest.cpp, line 180 > > > > > > why should they? you already have the solution in the previous hunk. Doh, I'm just a silly moose.

Re: Review Request 109551: port KPtyProcess to QProcess

2013-03-18 Thread Oswald Buddenhagen
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/109551/#review29421 --- kpty/tests/kptyprocesstest.cpp