Thanks Tuukka, that makes sense, I'll have a look at how big they are. Marco Piccolino
Il 08 giu 2017 8:02 AM, "Tuukka Turunen" <[email protected]> ha scritto: > > > Hi, > > > > Dropping ARMv7 and i386 iOS binaries should help in this. > > > > Yours, > > > > Tuukka > > > > *From: *Development <development-bounces+tuukka.turunen= > [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]> ha scritto: > > Send Development mailing list submissions to > [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] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [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]> > To: Jason H <[email protected]>, Lorn Potter <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" <[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]>: > >> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2017 at 12:34 AM > >> From: "Lorn Potter" <[email protected]> > >> To: [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] > > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development > > -- > Regards, > Konstantin > > > > ---------- Messaggio inoltrato ---------- > From: Lorn Potter <[email protected]> > To: Jason H <[email protected]> > Cc: [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]> > >> To: [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]> > To: Lorn Potter <[email protected]> > Cc: [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]> > > To: "Jason H" <[email protected]> > > Cc: [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]> > > >> To: [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]> > To: "<[email protected]>" <[email protected]> > Cc: qt-creator <[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 <development-bounces+alexander.blasche=qt.io@qt- > project.org> on behalf of Eike Ziller <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, 15 May 2017 10:43:57 AM > To: <[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] > 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] > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development > > > > ---------- Messaggio inoltrato ---------- > From: Jani Heikkinen <[email protected]> > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Cc: "[email protected]" <[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]> > To: Jani Heikkinen <[email protected]> > Cc: Qt development mailing list <[email protected]>, " > [email protected]" <[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]> 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] > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development > > >
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
