Hi,
Dropping ARMv7 and i386 iOS binaries should help in this.
Yours,
Tuukka
From: Development <[email protected]> on
behalf of Marco Piccolino <[email protected]>
Date: Thursday, 8 June 2017 at 8.37
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Development] Qt 5.10 pre-built binaries
Hello,
Would you also consider creating a smaller macOS offline installer? Current
version with Android and iOS is at 3.5 Gb and has been reported to cause
persistent timeouts when downloaded on CI like Travis.
Is providing android and iOS as add-on installs an option?
Marco Piccolino
Il 07 giu 2017 9:30 AM,
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
ha scritto:
Send Development mailing list submissions to
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Development digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Future of Qt on Web? (Konstantin Tokarev)
2. Re: Future of Qt on Web? (Lorn Potter)
3. Re: Future of Qt on Web? (Jason H)
4. Re: Nominating Vikas Pachdha for Approver status (Alex Blasche)
5. Qt 5.10 pre-built bunaries (Jani Heikkinen)
6. Re: Qt 5.10 pre-built bunaries (Lars Knoll)
---------- Messaggio inoltrato ----------
From: Konstantin Tokarev <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
To: Jason H <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Lorn Potter
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Bcc:
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2017 17:22:26 +0300
Subject: Re: [Development] Future of Qt on Web?
05.06.2017, 17:20, "Jason H" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>:
>> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2017 at 12:34 AM
>> From: "Lorn Potter" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
>> To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [Development] Future of Qt on Web?
>>
>> On 06/05/2017 07:00 AM, Jason H wrote:
>> > While Qt is not a web framework, over time there have been efforts to use
>> it on the web (outlined below).
>> >
>> > Given that Chrome is dropping NaCL
>> (http://www.tomshardware.com/news/chrome-deprecates-pnacl-embraces-webassembly,34583.html)
>> and the WebGL streaming is also not ideal (but better?), I am wondering
>> about the future of Qt on Web? Will there be a WebAssembly version of Qt?
>>
>> We have been working on Qt5 for webassembly.
>> I was just writing a short blog about this:
>>
>> http://qtandeverything.blogspot.com.au/2017/06/qt-for-web-assembly.html
>
> That is great news! You mention the wasm is smaller? How much smaller?
This article says it's smaller than asm.js, not NaCl
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
--
Regards,
Konstantin
---------- Messaggio inoltrato ----------
From: Lorn Potter <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
To: Jason H <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Bcc:
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 05:26:53 +1000
Subject: Re: [Development] Future of Qt on Web?
On 06/06/2017 12:20 AM, Jason H wrote:
>
>
>> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2017 at 12:34 AM
>> From: "Lorn Potter" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
>> To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [Development] Future of Qt on Web?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 06/05/2017 07:00 AM, Jason H wrote:
>>> While Qt is not a web framework, over time there have been efforts to use
>>> it on the web (outlined below).
>>>
>>> Given that Chrome is dropping NaCL
>>> (http://www.tomshardware.com/news/chrome-deprecates-pnacl-embraces-webassembly,34583.html)
>>> and the WebGL streaming is also not ideal (but better?), I am wondering
>>> about the future of Qt on Web? Will there be a WebAssembly version of Qt?
>>
>> We have been working on Qt5 for webassembly.
>> I was just writing a short blog about this:
>>
>> http://qtandeverything.blogspot.com.au/2017/06/qt-for-web-assembly.html
>
> That is great news! You mention the wasm is smaller? How much smaller?
For one small example app (standarddialog) the difference between asmjs
and wasm is:
wasm: 520 k js file and 14 MB wasm file.
asmjs: 69 MB js file.
---------- Messaggio inoltrato ----------
From: Jason H <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
To: Lorn Potter <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Bcc:
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 21:51:53 +0200
Subject: Re: [Development] Future of Qt on Web?
> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2017 at 3:26 PM
> From: "Lorn Potter" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> To: "Jason H" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Development] Future of Qt on Web?
>
>
>
> On 06/06/2017 12:20 AM, Jason H wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2017 at 12:34 AM
> >> From: "Lorn Potter" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
> >> To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> >> Subject: Re: [Development] Future of Qt on Web?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 06/05/2017 07:00 AM, Jason H wrote:
> >>> While Qt is not a web framework, over time there have been efforts to use
> >>> it on the web (outlined below).
> >>>
> >>> Given that Chrome is dropping NaCL
> >>> (http://www.tomshardware.com/news/chrome-deprecates-pnacl-embraces-webassembly,34583.html)
> >>> and the WebGL streaming is also not ideal (but better?), I am wondering
> >>> about the future of Qt on Web? Will there be a WebAssembly version of Qt?
> >>
> >> We have been working on Qt5 for webassembly.
> >> I was just writing a short blog about this:
> >>
> >> http://qtandeverything.blogspot.com.au/2017/06/qt-for-web-assembly.html
> >
> > That is great news! You mention the wasm is smaller? How much smaller?
>
> For one small example app (standarddialog) the difference between asmjs
> and wasm is:
>
> wasm: 520 k js file and 14 MB wasm file.
> asmjs: 69 MB js file.
That's encouraging. It's almost reasonable. Maybe a progressive web app would
be the way to go?
But I don't think that is using the browser in the best way? You're effectively
telling it how to redraw everything, rather than letting it do what it already
knows how to do. Is that a fair statement?
---------- Messaggio inoltrato ----------
From: Alex Blasche <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
To: "<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: qt-creator <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Bcc:
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 11:58:08 +0000
Subject: Re: [Development] Nominating Vikas Pachdha for Approver status
Congratulations to Vikas. The rights have been adjusted.
--
Alex
________________________________________
From: Development
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
on behalf of Eike Ziller <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Monday, 15 May 2017 10:43:57 AM
To: <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: qt-creator
Subject: [Development] Nominating Vikas Pachdha for Approver status
Hereby I nominate Vikas Pachdha for Approver status. He has been defacto
maintaining iOS support in Qt Creator since a year.
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/owner:%22Vikas+Pachdha%22+status:merged,n,z
Br,
--
Eike Ziller
Principal Software Engineer
The Qt Company GmbH
Rudower Chaussee 13
D-12489 Berlin
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
http://qt.io
Geschäftsführer: Mika Pälsi,
Juha Varelius, Mika Harjuaho
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB
144331 B
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
---------- Messaggio inoltrato ----------
From: Jani Heikkinen <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Bcc:
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 06:57:10 +0000
Subject: [Development] Qt 5.10 pre-built bunaries
Hi all,
There has been discussion ongoing about 5.10 supported platforms and CI
configurations. What we haven't agreed yet is Qt 5.10 pre-built binaries. I
don't see big need to change anything from 5.9 but there is still couple of
things on my mind:
- Should we now switch from MinGW32 bit -> MinGW 64bit ones? With 5.9 this was
too early but would it be time to do it now? Offering both isn't an option. And
5,9 is LTS so 5.10 could be good release to change that...
- Can we start using RHEL 7.4 for linux packaging? Tony is planning to add RHEL
7.4 in CI and so on it would be wise to replace 7.2 with 7.4 in the packaging
as well
Is there some other change proposals which we should discuss about?
br,
Jani
---------- Messaggio inoltrato ----------
From: Lars Knoll <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
To: Jani Heikkinen <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: Qt development mailing list
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,
"[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Bcc:
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 07:30:15 +0000
Subject: Re: [Development] Qt 5.10 pre-built bunaries
Hi Jani,
> On 7 Jun 2017, at 08:57, Jani Heikkinen
> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> There has been discussion ongoing about 5.10 supported platforms and CI
> configurations. What we haven't agreed yet is Qt 5.10 pre-built binaries. I
> don't see big need to change anything from 5.9 but there is still couple of
> things on my mind:
>
> - Should we now switch from MinGW32 bit -> MinGW 64bit ones? With 5.9 this
> was too early but would it be time to do it now? Offering both isn't an
> option. And 5,9 is LTS so 5.10 could be good release to change that...
We got a lot of questions about 32bit binaries still in the comments to the
release blog. But those were pretty much all about VS2017. I'd personally be
happy to move more towards 64 bit, but we should somehow find out how much
32bit is still required by our users.
>
> - Can we start using RHEL 7.4 for linux packaging? Tony is planning to add
> RHEL 7.4 in CI and so on it would be wise to replace 7.2 with 7.4 in the
> packaging as well
Sounds good to me, unless anybody knows about any reasons why we should stay on
7.2.
>
> Is there some other change proposals which we should discuss about?
I think we should strongly consider dropping 32bit for iOS.
Cheers,
Lars
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
