Re: Supported Compilers / C++11 Support in KF5

Am 7/21/2013 13:52, schrieb Rolf Eike Beer: > Explicit virtual overrides require g++ 4.7: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html > > This is trivially to work around by a CMake time check and then just define > override to empty. Not so. 'override' is a legal identifier, not a pure keyword.

Re: Fixes in Git (first in stable, then merge to master)

Am 7/21/2011 23:22, schrieb Aurélien Gâteau: > What I have been doing recently to avoid cherry-picking is to create my > fixes in a separate work branch, then merge the branch in both 4.7 and > master branches. This way the commits do not have different commit ids. But this works only if you fork

Re: RFC: replacing MacroLogFeature.cmake with FeatureSummary.cmake

Am 7/14/2011 20:48, schrieb Alexander Neundorf: > Should the output be > > Missing REQUIRED packages: > * A > * B > * C > > Missing RECOMMENDED packages: > * E > * F > * G > > or would > > Missing packages: > * A (REQUIRED) > * B (REQUIRED) > * C (REQUIRED) > * E (RECOMMENDED) > * F (RECOMMEND

Re: Review Request: Adding Ångström to KUnitConversion

Am 3/22/2011 23:14, schrieb Parker Coates: > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/100923/ > > > kunitconversion/length.cpp > > (Diff revision 1) > > Length::Len

Re: git workflow draft

Am 2/18/2011 11:37, schrieb Parker Coates: > This is off topic, but is there a git tool to run a particular command > (for example, cmake && make && ./test) for every commit in a range? > Something like git-bisect without the bisecting. > > More than once, I've rebased a local topic branch and bee

Re: Review Request: Enable kDebug/kWarning/kError colors when sending output to file instead of tty

Am 2/17/2011 21:49, schrieb Sergio Luis Martins: > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/100675/ > > > Review request for kdelibs. > By Sergio Luis Martins. > > > Description > > The existing KDE_COLOR_DEBUG env variable enables colors

Re: git workflow draft

I'm tired aguing, so I'll leave it at that. Just one point (because I don't want to be called silly): Am 2/17/2011 21:56, schrieb Stephen Kelly: >> Choose a starting point >> that is convenient; but DO NOT CHANGE IT once you have done serious >> development, because a change (aka rebase) basically

Re: git workflow draft

Am 2/17/2011 12:10, schrieb Andreas Hartmetz: > On Thursday 17 February 2011 09:01:05 Johannes Sixt wrote: >> When you develop a new feature, it is a very important choice on which >> version of the software you base it on. I am advocating to base a feature >> on a well-known,

Re: git workflow draft

Am 2/16/2011 22:10, schrieb Stephen Kelly: > As one of the people asked to describe my idea of the workflow (which should > focus on rebasing, not merging) I put write up here: > > http://community.kde.org/20110213_GitWorkflowAgenda/StevesIdea > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.kde.scm-inte

Re: Merge or Cherry-Pick?

Am 2/10/2011 10:40, schrieb Ben Cooksley: > On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 9:35 PM, Johannes Sixt wrote: >> git push origin KDE/4.6 > > This is wrong, as it would try to push the content of HEAD (the merge > of origin/KDE/4.6 into a checkout of origin/master) into KDE/4.6. Now you m

Re: Merge or Cherry-Pick?

Am 2/9/2011 18:28, schrieb John Layt: > On Tuesday 08 February 2011 17:49:12 Nicolás Alvarez wrote: Or should I give up and cherry-pick ? (I'd really like not to). >>> >>> My recommendation: Keep the fix in 4.6 only for the moment. Just wait >>> until the initial merge has happened - and lets

Re: Initial merge

Am 2/4/2011 13:51, schrieb Andreas Pakulat: > On 04.02.11 08:47:08, Johannes Sixt wrote: >> Am 2/3/2011 13:04, schrieb Johannes Sixt: >> The simplicity results from two assumptions: >> >> (1) All back- and forward-porting was complete when SVN went >> read-only.

Initial merge (was: Re: Merge or Cherry-Pick?)

Am 2/3/2011 13:04, schrieb Johannes Sixt: > Before anybody begins to work in this way, someone with sufficient > knowlege must introduce the first real merge of the 4.6 branch into the > master branch. The conflicts must be resolved; or it is possible to punt > by using -s ours. >

Re: Merge or Cherry-Pick?

Am 2/3/2011 13:42, schrieb Hugo Pereira Da Costa: > My understanding is also that people should refrain from cherry-picking > before > this original merge happens, cause that would only make it more painful. Not necessarily. When you cherry-pick from one branch to another, and this works withou

Re: Merge or Cherry-Pick?

Am 2/3/2011 12:15, schrieb Hugo Pereira Da Costa: > So I git cloned KDE/4.6 into some local branch (git checkout KDE/4.6; git > checkout -b toolbuttons), then fix, then test. > > Now I want to merge to the KDE/4.6 branch; thats easy. > > Then I want to merge to master (or to some local branch cl

Re: Merge or Cherry-Pick?

Am 2/3/2011 6:10, schrieb Dawit A: > What happens if I tested a bug fix and wanted it to push it upstream > so that it can receive even wider testing, but it just so happens the > time to tag the next bug fix release is right around the corner ? The > original intent is to at least leave the bug fi

Re: Merge or Cherry-Pick?

Am 2/1/2011 10:31, schrieb David Jarvie: > On Mon, January 31, 2011 11:27 pm, Thiago Macieira wrote: >> On Monday, 31 de January de 2011 23:34:39 Arno Rehn wrote: >>> I guess that won't quite work when there are commits specific to 4.6 in >>> the >>> 4.6 branch that shouldn't end up in master. And

Re: Usefulness of Subject-header of git commit mails

Am 1/28/2011 17:42, schrieb Andreas Hartmetz: > Semi-OT: What is the empty line good for? > Sometimes I just continue writing if the start of a long first sentence turns > out to be a good summary. No, really, you should make the summary line short (max 75 characters or so), and follow it by a bl

Re: kdelibs, kdebase moving to Git this Saturday

Am 1/28/2011 12:19, schrieb Torgny Nyblom: > On Friday 28 January 2011 11.05.43 Johannes Sixt wrote: >> Doesn't it operate with a git-fast-import stream? Wouldn't it just mean to >> flip a LF to a SP here and there? You wouldn't even have to change the >>

Re: kdelibs, kdebase moving to Git this Saturday

Am 1/28/2011 10:31, schrieb Torgny Nyblom: > On Friday 28 January 2011 00.06.21 Nicolas Alvarez wrote: >> John Tapsell wrote: >>> 2011/1/27 Nicolás Alvarez : Please, help review the repositories before migration! Unlike KDE software, here we won't have point releases to fix bugs later :)

Re: kdelibs, kdebase moving to Git this Saturday

Am 1/28/2011 4:06, schrieb Nicolas Alvarez: > John Tapsell wrote: >> 2011/1/27 Nicolás Alvarez : >>> Please, help review the repositories before migration! Unlike KDE >>> software, here we won't have point releases to fix bugs later :) >> >> I have quite a few commits in kdebase-workspace with the

Re: Changing my mind: reverting my menubar, toolbars and statusbar changes

Am 11/7/2010 20:12, schrieb Ingo Klöcker: > Quite frankly, I cannot image the number of users which grasp "[ ] Show > Toolbar" but not "[ ] Toolbar" to be significant. Surely, there are a > lot of not that computer literate people (like my parents) who > understand neither one nor the other. But