Le 25/06/2016 16:45, Richard Heck a écrit :
There is a discussion about this topic in the bug tracker that I
cannot understand. Scott and Richard are concerned that Dima'S build
contains malware. This is not fair. Dima invested some spare time to
fiddle around with Qt to prepare a Vista build and to test it. To
presume that a new contributor is not trustworthy is not the way we
should welcome new people!
This is a complete misunderstanding of what Scott and I were saying. We
think that our officially releasing a LyX binary on the LyX website,
especially one signed with the LyX key, means that we are making certain
sorts of guarantees to people. We cannot make those guarantees if the
binary has been built by someone we do not at all know.
I am not completely sure why we are having this surreal discussion. Uwe,
what is wrong with the following?
1/ Dima provides a patch that makes a Vista compatible build
2/ Kornel checks that the cmake part good enough for inclusion
3/ Uwe does his usual builds using this new code (the build are still OK
on modern windows, right?)
4/ Dima gets to check the binaries before we distribute it
This is not rocket science, is it? Why make it so dramatic?
JMarc
PS: BTW, did we drop XP support already?
