On 25.10.2012 7.32, Lincoln Ramsay a1291...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm pretty sure there's someone at Digia ready to take over maintenance
of the CI system. However, there isn't (to my knowledge) anyone ready to
take on the task of keeping Qt in a state that can pass through the CI
system. If nobody
Let's close this topic. It's not always the one who shouts loudest that wins an
argument.
We have a closed security mailing list, and I want to keep it that way. That
seems to also be in agreement with the majority of the maintainers who have
been dealing with this topic.
The members of the
On Thursday, October 25, 2012 13:00:47 Rohan McGovern wrote:
Replying here to some comments on IRC, since I'm rarely online at the
same time as the others, but I don't want to let all the comments go
unanswered...
jpnurmi [07:30:23] steveire: np, those tests have been annoying me
several
Op 25-10-2012 9:18, d3fault schreef:
a big re-itteration of yet the same arguments
Indeed, time for a conclusion. Oh wait: Lars already gave that conclusion:
http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2012-October/007511.html
Sorry that the conclusion doesn't match your ideas of the
On Thursday, October 25, 2012 02:32:49 PM Lincoln Ramsay wrote:
On 25/10/12 13:00, Rohan McGovern wrote:
True, there used to be Nokia employees reading every failure report and
chasing up apparently unstable tests, either trying to fix the tests, or
acknowledge them via bug reports and
*I am a citizen/_user_ of this open governance project?*
Please read:
http://qt-project.org/wiki/The_Qt_Governance_Model
Maybe you are a user, but from what I have read are not 'Evangelizing about
the Project' and you are not 'Providing moral support' (you are telling how
terrible things are).
-Original Message-
From: development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org
[mailto:development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org] On
Behalf Of Thiago Macieira
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 4:58 PM
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] xcb-icccm
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 01:00:47PM +1000, Rohan McGovern wrote:
Replying here to some comments on IRC, since I'm rarely online at the
same time as the others, but I don't want to let all the comments go
unanswered...
steveire [06:32:44] CI is seriously depresssing. For the last 24 hours
22.10.2012, 18:58, Thiago Macieira thiago.macie...@intel.com:
On segunda-feira, 22 de outubro de 2012 16.16.57, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
22.10.2012, 15:53, Koehne Kai kai.koe...@digia.com:
Hi,
In Qt 5 we're relying on libxcb instead of the aging xlib. One drawback is
that it limits
Sounds great!
But I thought it should only work with mingw-w64 (support directx9),
not mingw.orghttp://mingw.org, that right?
That's correct. I'll make sure the documentation is up-to-date on that point.
Myself and Kai have it working using the MinGW-Builds flavor of MinGw which as
I
-Original Message-
From: development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org
[mailto:development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org] On
Behalf Of Konstantin Tokarev
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 11:33 AM
To: Thiago Macieira; development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re:
On 10/25/2012 11:46 AM, Koehne Kai wrote:
-Original Message-
From: development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org
[mailto:development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org] On
Behalf Of Konstantin Tokarev
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 11:33 AM
To: Thiago Macieira;
-Original Message-
From: development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org
[mailto:development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org] On
Behalf Of Jason Barron
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 11:40 AM
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] Heads up
-Original Message-
From: Chris Adams [mailto:chris.ad...@qinetic.com.au]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 2:23 AM
To: Koehne Kai
Cc: Wehmer, Matthias; development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] QmlImportPath
[...]
I believe that the problem is that (as Aaron states in
Hi,
Qt-Project CI system migration to Digia hosting has been completed.
The last three projects (QtBase_master_Integration,Qt_4.8_Integration
and Qt5_master_Integration) were migrated during this morning.
AFAIK migration for all expect one last project succeeded without any
problems. There
The principal credit for the migration goes to Rohan. Congratulations to Rohan
and the Digia team.
Mark
On 25/10/2012, at 20:38, ext Anttila Janne janne.antt...@digia.com wrote:
Hi,
Qt-Project CI system migration to Digia hosting has been completed.
The last three projects
moin,
i posted such changes to several modules.
to my dismay, some maintainers have already approved *and staged/submitted*
these changes without being asked to, thus breaking things (because these
changes depend on pending qtbase changes).
i don't know how many more times i need to repeat this:
On quinta-feira, 25 de outubro de 2012 09.00.40, Koehne Kai wrote:
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,38146
A couple of notes:
- I'm trying to not only link libxcb-icccm statically, but all libxcb-*
libs.
- it still leaves a general libxcb.so dependency on Ubuntu 11.10 at
least,
Hello,
Afaik QCoreApplication::watchUnixSignal() seems to be no longer used, at least
in Qt5. If that is really the case, would anyone object doing away with it
(and removing the overhead from QEventDispatchUnix::doSelect() and co.)?
Otherwise, what are the possible use cases?
Any thoughts?
-
On 25/10/12 15:16, Rafael Roquetto wrote:
Hello,
Afaik QCoreApplication::watchUnixSignal() seems to be no longer used, at least
in Qt5. If that is really the case, would anyone object doing away with it
(and removing the overhead from QEventDispatchUnix::doSelect() and co.)?
Otherwise, what
Hi,
We are currently working on Mac release package related problems and therefore
those cannot be found from http://releases.qt-project.org/digia/4.8.4_RC/ . If
you have findings from other packages please send those to
releas...@qt-project.orgmailto:releas...@qt-project.org .
Br,
Akseli
-Original Message-
From: development-bounces+shane.kearns=accenture@qt-project.org
[mailto:development-bounces+shane.kearns=accenture@qt-project.org]
On Behalf Of Rafael Roquetto
Sent: 25 October 2012 15:17
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: [Development] Cleanup of
On quinta-feira, 25 de outubro de 2012 00.18.32, d3fault wrote:
Qt has corporate roots. Responsible Disclosure has been in place since
the Trolltech days. Corporations tend to prefer Responsible Disclosure
because it pleases their commercial customers. Commercial entities
like to keep their
Shawn Rutledge spaketh:
Personally I think the fundamental problem which CI could do better is to
triage problems. snip,
I think when a test fails, the CI system should try to break down the
patch set in some way. For example it could divide the patch set in half,
arbitrarily, and see if
Shawn Rutledge said:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 01:00:47PM +1000, Rohan McGovern wrote:
Replying here to some comments on IRC, since I'm rarely online at the
same time as the others, but I don't want to let all the comments go
unanswered...
steveire [06:32:44] CI is seriously
Hello All,
I'm trying to compile Qt5 on Solaris 11 and am running in to bugs. I don't
mind mopping up Solaris compile issues on Qt4 and Qt5, but a question about
procedure: should I continue to post my build issues to the mailing list or
just open tickets on Jira only?
Current build error:
CC
On quinta-feira, 25 de outubro de 2012 20.38.45, Geoffrey Gowey wrote:
Hello All,
I'm trying to compile Qt5 on Solaris 11 and am running in to bugs. I don't
mind mopping up Solaris compile issues on Qt4 and Qt5, but a question about
procedure: should I continue to post my build issues to
Thank you Thiago for actually presenting an argument instead of just
responding with noise (or just dismissively waving your hand as in the
case of Lars).
On 10/25/12, Thiago Macieira thiago.macie...@intel.com wrote:
commercial entities have good people who make intelligent and logical
On quinta-feira, 25 de outubro de 2012 19.42.12, d3fault wrote:
What's more important in this is that the
level of competence and resources in the exploit community varies a lot. I
can agree that exploiters with vast resources may learn the security
issues before the full disclosure happens,
this group WILL be hacked
Nah. WILL is too strong a statement. More like: very very very very likely ;-)
Besides, this argument does not counter mine. I am asserting that the number
of attackers who get access to the exploits before they become public is much,
much smaller than the number of
30 matches
Mail list logo
