Re: [SailfishDevel] QtLocation | Qt 5.6

2017-08-23 Thread rinigus 
Tone,

while IRC is great for direct communication, I prefer not to allocate my
work time for it. Many of us have jobs that are not related to SFOS and it
seems to me that the developer's mailing list is appropriate place to ask
API-related questions. By sending questions via email, it allows the others
to reply at their convenience. I sincerely hope that veskuh will find time
to reply to them.

Cheers,

Rinigus

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Tone Kastlunger  wrote:

> @rinigus, drop it as a topic in the meeting thread
>
> https://together.jolla.com/question/54157/sailfishos-
> open-source-collaboration-meeting-planning/
>
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 9:56 AM, rinigus  wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> it would be great to get update on the state of QtLocation 5.6. As
>> suggested by Chris, *"veskuh would be the best person to describe our
>> intent going forward, and possible roadmap for updating"*. In
>> particular, for people working on map and navigation apps, would be good to
>> know
>>
>> * Has Jolla decided whether they want to work on QtLocation/5.6?
>>
>> * If its decided that its impossible to include QtLocation due to
>> licensing issues, can the community help to provide the QtLocation via our
>> packages?
>>
>> * If you just haven't had time for working on QtLocation 5.6, how can we
>> help and where should we start?
>>
>> One of the questions posted earlier (Jul 7) on whether Jolla started
>> working on it was already replied by Chris (No).
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Rinigus
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 8:39 AM, rinigus  wrote:
>>
>>> Morning,
>>>
>>> this is to bump the thread with the hope of getting a reply regarding
>>> QtLocation status and plans.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Rinigus
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 9:08 AM, rinigus  wrote:
>>>
 Hi Chris,

 thank you very much for an update. Looking forward for veskuh's reply
 and, hopefully, we can move forward with this API as well.

 Cheers,

 Rinigus

 On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 3:40 AM, Chris Adams 
 wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I think veskuh will be the best to answer these questions.
>
> Currently, I don't think any work has gone toward upgrading QtLocation
> to version 5.6 yet, as we're busy with other projects.  Originally the
> decision to not take QtLocation 5.6 into use along with the rest of the Qt
> 5.6 libs was, I believe, because of the different licensing of QtLocation.
> I think veskuh would be the best person to describe our intent going
> forward, and possible roadmap for updating.
>
> Best regards,
> Chris.
>
>
> --
> *From:* Devel [devel-boun...@lists.sailfishos.org] on behalf of
> rinigus [rinigus@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, July 07, 2017 6:04 PM
> *To:* Sailfish OS Developers
> *Subject:* Re: [SailfishDevel] QtLocation | Qt 5.6
>
> Hi,
>
> it has been rather quiet regarding QtLocation 5.6 during the "first
> quarter of 2017" (see earlier emails in this thread). I would like to
> continue my work on navigation/mapping solutions for SFOS and the
> uncertainty regarding QtLocation is just slowing everything down and lead
> to major inefficiency in the development of this important aspect of SFOS.
>
> I would like to know what is the state of QtLocation and its future in
> SFOS. From the activity in https://git.merproject.org/mer
> -core/qtlocation/activity
> 
> I conclude that the developers working on it are @chriadam, @pvuorela,
> @xfade, Slava Monich, and @msmirnov. Maybe some of you can take time and
> reply. In particular:
>
> * Has any work started on upgrading QtLocation to 5.6?
>
> * Has Jolla decided whether they want to work on QtLocation/5.6?
>
> * If its decided that its impossible to include QtLocation due to
> licensing issues, can the community help to provide the QtLocation via our
> packages?
>
> * If you just haven't had time for working on QtLocation 5.6, how can
> we help and where should we start?
>
> It looks to me that QtLocation is the component that is pushed for map
> applications development. I presume that it would be wise to use it as 
> well
> and not waste time to re-invent something similar. Or is there anything
> considerably better and we should work on that instead?
>
> Since it is developers channel, its an appropriate place to ask, I
> believe.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Rinigus
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:49 PM, Tone Kastlunger <
> users.giulie...@gmail.com
>

Re: [SailfishDevel] QtLocation | Qt 5.6

2017-08-23 Thread Tone Kastlunger 
@rinigus, drop it as a topic in the meeting thread

https://together.jolla.com/question/54157/sailfishos-open-source-collaboration-meeting-planning/

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 9:56 AM, rinigus  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> it would be great to get update on the state of QtLocation 5.6. As
> suggested by Chris, *"veskuh would be the best person to describe our
> intent going forward, and possible roadmap for updating"*. In particular,
> for people working on map and navigation apps, would be good to know
>
> * Has Jolla decided whether they want to work on QtLocation/5.6?
>
> * If its decided that its impossible to include QtLocation due to
> licensing issues, can the community help to provide the QtLocation via our
> packages?
>
> * If you just haven't had time for working on QtLocation 5.6, how can we
> help and where should we start?
>
> One of the questions posted earlier (Jul 7) on whether Jolla started
> working on it was already replied by Chris (No).
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Rinigus
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 8:39 AM, rinigus  wrote:
>
>> Morning,
>>
>> this is to bump the thread with the hope of getting a reply regarding
>> QtLocation status and plans.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Rinigus
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 9:08 AM, rinigus  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Chris,
>>>
>>> thank you very much for an update. Looking forward for veskuh's reply
>>> and, hopefully, we can move forward with this API as well.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Rinigus
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 3:40 AM, Chris Adams 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi,

 I think veskuh will be the best to answer these questions.

 Currently, I don't think any work has gone toward upgrading QtLocation
 to version 5.6 yet, as we're busy with other projects.  Originally the
 decision to not take QtLocation 5.6 into use along with the rest of the Qt
 5.6 libs was, I believe, because of the different licensing of QtLocation.
 I think veskuh would be the best person to describe our intent going
 forward, and possible roadmap for updating.

 Best regards,
 Chris.


 --
 *From:* Devel [devel-boun...@lists.sailfishos.org] on behalf of
 rinigus [rinigus@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Friday, July 07, 2017 6:04 PM
 *To:* Sailfish OS Developers
 *Subject:* Re: [SailfishDevel] QtLocation | Qt 5.6

 Hi,

 it has been rather quiet regarding QtLocation 5.6 during the "first
 quarter of 2017" (see earlier emails in this thread). I would like to
 continue my work on navigation/mapping solutions for SFOS and the
 uncertainty regarding QtLocation is just slowing everything down and lead
 to major inefficiency in the development of this important aspect of SFOS.

 I would like to know what is the state of QtLocation and its future in
 SFOS. From the activity in https://git.merproject.org/mer
 -core/qtlocation/activity
 
 I conclude that the developers working on it are @chriadam, @pvuorela,
 @xfade, Slava Monich, and @msmirnov. Maybe some of you can take time and
 reply. In particular:

 * Has any work started on upgrading QtLocation to 5.6?

 * Has Jolla decided whether they want to work on QtLocation/5.6?

 * If its decided that its impossible to include QtLocation due to
 licensing issues, can the community help to provide the QtLocation via our
 packages?

 * If you just haven't had time for working on QtLocation 5.6, how can
 we help and where should we start?

 It looks to me that QtLocation is the component that is pushed for map
 applications development. I presume that it would be wise to use it as well
 and not waste time to re-invent something similar. Or is there anything
 considerably better and we should work on that instead?

 Since it is developers channel, its an appropriate place to ask, I
 believe.

 Best wishes,

 Rinigus

 On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:49 PM, Tone Kastlunger <
 users.giulie...@gmail.com
 
 > wrote:

> I'd support this, not enough has been coming through at the meeting
> IMO to have a clear yes/no answer.
>
> Best,
> tortoisedoc
>
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 11:32 PM, Adam Pigg  
> > wrote:
>
>> I guess we need to wait for the internal review that was mentioned in
>> the meeting, however it would be interesting to understand the issues 
>> jolla
>> have

[SailfishDevel] Sailfish OS, open source collaboration meeting, August 23rd 2017 at 08:00 UTC

2017-08-23 Thread James Noori 

Hi all,

Thanks for adding your topics to the planning page, we skipped the 
reminder email since there already were enough topics announced.


Today your chair will be Simonas Leleiva (sledges on IRC) as I won't be 
available at the time of the meeting.


The agenda for today's meeting is as follows:

Date: 08/23/2017
Time: 08:00 UTC
Duration: Approximately 65 minutes
Chair: Sledges
Location: #mer-meeting on freenode IRC 
http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=#mer-meeting


Topics to be discussed:

-   Intro (5 min)
-   Energy Aware Scheduling (EAS) (10 min - asked by nh1402)
-   UnitTesting QML apps (20 min - asked by M-schmittlauch)
-   Update for Xperia X port (10 min - asked by jenix)
-   General discussion (15 min)
-   Next meeting time and date (5min)

Please familiarize yourself with the topics before the meeting, as well
as the common Meetbot commands https://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot (it's
used for meeting management and logging)

Thanks and best regards,
James Noori

___
SailfishOS.org Devel mailing list
To unsubscribe, please send a mail to devel-unsubscr...@lists.sailfishos.org

Re: [SailfishDevel] QtLocation | Qt 5.6

2017-08-23 Thread rinigus 
Hi,

it would be great to get update on the state of QtLocation 5.6. As
suggested by Chris, *"veskuh would be the best person to describe our
intent going forward, and possible roadmap for updating"*. In particular,
for people working on map and navigation apps, would be good to know

* Has Jolla decided whether they want to work on QtLocation/5.6?

* If its decided that its impossible to include QtLocation due to licensing
issues, can the community help to provide the QtLocation via our packages?

* If you just haven't had time for working on QtLocation 5.6, how can we
help and where should we start?

One of the questions posted earlier (Jul 7) on whether Jolla started
working on it was already replied by Chris (No).

Best wishes,

Rinigus


On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 8:39 AM, rinigus  wrote:

> Morning,
>
> this is to bump the thread with the hope of getting a reply regarding
> QtLocation status and plans.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rinigus
>
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 9:08 AM, rinigus  wrote:
>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> thank you very much for an update. Looking forward for veskuh's reply
>> and, hopefully, we can move forward with this API as well.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Rinigus
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 3:40 AM, Chris Adams 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I think veskuh will be the best to answer these questions.
>>>
>>> Currently, I don't think any work has gone toward upgrading QtLocation
>>> to version 5.6 yet, as we're busy with other projects.  Originally the
>>> decision to not take QtLocation 5.6 into use along with the rest of the Qt
>>> 5.6 libs was, I believe, because of the different licensing of QtLocation.
>>> I think veskuh would be the best person to describe our intent going
>>> forward, and possible roadmap for updating.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Chris.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *From:* Devel [devel-boun...@lists.sailfishos.org] on behalf of rinigus
>>> [rinigus@gmail.com]
>>> *Sent:* Friday, July 07, 2017 6:04 PM
>>> *To:* Sailfish OS Developers
>>> *Subject:* Re: [SailfishDevel] QtLocation | Qt 5.6
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> it has been rather quiet regarding QtLocation 5.6 during the "first
>>> quarter of 2017" (see earlier emails in this thread). I would like to
>>> continue my work on navigation/mapping solutions for SFOS and the
>>> uncertainty regarding QtLocation is just slowing everything down and lead
>>> to major inefficiency in the development of this important aspect of SFOS.
>>>
>>> I would like to know what is the state of QtLocation and its future in
>>> SFOS. From the activity in https://git.merproject.org/mer
>>> -core/qtlocation/activity
>>> 
>>> I conclude that the developers working on it are @chriadam, @pvuorela,
>>> @xfade, Slava Monich, and @msmirnov. Maybe some of you can take time and
>>> reply. In particular:
>>>
>>> * Has any work started on upgrading QtLocation to 5.6?
>>>
>>> * Has Jolla decided whether they want to work on QtLocation/5.6?
>>>
>>> * If its decided that its impossible to include QtLocation due to
>>> licensing issues, can the community help to provide the QtLocation via our
>>> packages?
>>>
>>> * If you just haven't had time for working on QtLocation 5.6, how can we
>>> help and where should we start?
>>>
>>> It looks to me that QtLocation is the component that is pushed for map
>>> applications development. I presume that it would be wise to use it as well
>>> and not waste time to re-invent something similar. Or is there anything
>>> considerably better and we should work on that instead?
>>>
>>> Since it is developers channel, its an appropriate place to ask, I
>>> believe.
>>>
>>> Best wishes,
>>>
>>> Rinigus
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:49 PM, Tone Kastlunger <
>>> users.giulie...@gmail.com
>>> 
>>> > wrote:
>>>
 I'd support this, not enough has been coming through at the meeting IMO
 to have a clear yes/no answer.

 Best,
 tortoisedoc

 On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 11:32 PM, Adam Pigg 
 > wrote:

> I guess we need to wait for the internal review that was mentioned in
> the meeting, however it would be interesting to understand the issues 
> jolla
> have with particular licenses for software included in sfos.
>
> On Mon, 9 Jan 2017 at 21:29 Osmo Salomaa  >
> wrote:
>
>> On 09.01.2017 13:01, rinigus wrote:
>> > from reading the meeting transcript it seems that we