Re: [Development] Timeouts on download.qt.io
Hi, Having trouble as well - starting with the main page: request -> reply seems to take almost 5min. Navigation into subfolders has varying results 30s up to 5min (only tried the snapshots area) Downloading works, but download rates are varying quite a lot while downloading. From: Development on behalf of Andrey Leman via Development Sent: Tuesday, July 4, 2023 8:22 PM To: Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer; development@qt-project.org Subject: Re: [Development] Timeouts on download.qt.io Hi, Some apache changes have been made. Please check if it works fine now. From: Development on behalf of Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer Date: Sunday, 2 July 2023, 00:00 To: development@qt-project.org Subject: [Development] Timeouts on download.qt.io Hi! I am currently experiencing random timeouts on download.qt.io. Sometimes it works fine, sometimes not. The rest of my connections are stable as usual, so at least for me it seems a problem on the server side. -- Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Nominating Marcus Tillmanns as Approver
+1 for sure From: Development on behalf of Alessandro Portale via Development Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2022 11:11 PM To: A. Pönitz; development@qt-project.org; Cristian Adam; Jaroslaw Kobus Subject: Re: [Development] Nominating Marcus Tillmanns as Approver Hey, I wanted to nominate him! Anyways, +1, Br, Alessandro (Disclaimer: Marcus regularly lets me win in table tennis) Von: Development im Auftrag von Jaroslaw Kobus via Development Gesendet: Dienstag, 22. November 2022 22:49 An: A. Pönitz; development@qt-project.org; Cristian Adam Betreff: Re: [Development] Nominating Marcus Tillmanns as Approver +1 Good job, Marcus! Jarek From: Development on behalf of Cristian Adam via Development Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2022 10:39 PM To: A. Pönitz; development@qt-project.org Subject: Re: [Development] Nominating Marcus Tillmanns as Approver +1 Cheers, Cristian. Disclaimer: I work with Marcus in the same team. From: Development on behalf of A. Pönitz Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2022 22:27 To: development@qt-project.org Subject: [Development] Nominating Marcus Tillmanns as Approver I'd like to nominate Marcus Tillmanns as an approver for the Qt project. Marcus has been working on Qt Creator since April, mostly on Docker support and remote file access/command execution, but also on LLDB support and various other changes across the code base. He made already several excellent contributions, most notably authored the remote filesystem browsing capabilities in Creator 9. I trust him to be a good approver. Link to his gerrit dashboard: Patches: https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/owner:marcus.tillmanns%2540qt.io Reviews: https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/reviewer:marcus.tillmanns%2540qt.io We are working in the same team, and share an office. Andre' ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Qt 5.13 feature freeze is getting closer
Nope, I'm talking about the module.. But inside the plugin review I try to limit my criticism to the QC part as there are more competent developer to tell you how to do the stuff correctly inside a Qt module. But even I see lots of stuff there that is a plain mess and should not be a part of Qt in its current state. From: Aleksey Kontsevich Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2019 2:07:19 PM To: Christian Stenger; Maurice Kalinowski; Lars Knoll; Thiago Macieira Cc: Qt development mailing list Subject: Re: [Development] Qt 5.13 feature freeze is getting closer Your are mostly talking about the plugin not telemetry module which is ok now. And even in the plugin most of your concerns related not to API or logic (there was much misunderstanding) like code styling and conventions explicit keyword for ctor, connect() styles, comments, etc. -- Best regards, Aleksey Linked in https://www.linkedin.com/in/alekseykontsevich 17.01.2019, 14:19, "Christian Stenger" : >> There were not concerns about code quality, :) was concerns about code >> styles conventions, etc. All of these was fixed, only qdoc left to do > > You must be kidding... This is still a complete mess and definitely not ready > for more than a playground. > > > From: Development on behalf of Aleksey > Kontsevich > Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2019 1:03:55 PM > To: Maurice Kalinowski; Lars Knoll; Thiago Macieira > Cc: Qt development mailing list > Subject: Re: [Development] Qt 5.13 feature freeze is getting closer > >> That is beside all the concerns about the quality of the code and missing >> actions to fix these. > > There were not concerns about code quality, :) was concerns about code styles > conventions, etc. All of these was fixed, only qdoc left to do. > > -- > Best regards, > Aleksey > Linked in https://www.linkedin.com/in/alekseykontsevich > > 17.01.2019, 10:22, "Maurice Kalinowski" : >> Well even for TP there should be some consensus on whether it should be >> part of Qt or not, no? >> >> We are lacking documentation on the process here, all I could find was >> https://wiki.qt.io/Creating_a_new_module_or_tool_for_Qt#Graduating_from_the_Playground. >> >> “This decision is done on the qt-development mailing list, based on the >> technical and spirit fit to Qt, and it requires the approval of the Chief >> Maintainer.” >> >> To my knowledge this has not happened at all. There was only a repository >> request so far, none for integrating it into the product line. >> >> That is beside all the concerns about the quality of the code and missing >> actions to fix these. >> >> Maurice >> >> From: Development On Behalf Of Lars >> Knoll >> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2019 8:56 PM >> To: Thiago Macieira >> Cc: Qt development mailing list >> Subject: Re: [Development] Qt 5.13 feature freeze is getting closer >> >>> On 16 Jan 2019, at 19:54, Thiago Macieira >>> wrote: >>> >>> On Wednesday, 16 January 2019 09:44:40 PST Aleksey Kontsevich wrote: >>> >>>> In Nov, there was long discussion in review: >>>> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/240347/ Request was initially for >>>> both: plugin and library - latter was transformed to Qt module. >>> >>> Given that this is a complete surprise, I don't think we can find enough >>> time >>> to do a review of it as a module in time for 5.13. >> >> As far as I understood it the request was for a TP status, not a fully >> supported module. >> >>> In particular, I want to >>> take a look to see how it can integrate with a project my team is working >>> on: >>> https://clearlinux.org/documentation/clear-linux/concepts/telemetry-about >> >> Why should that project influence a telemetry module for Qt? >> >>> So I think that for 5.13, the module can be at no higher state than >>> experimental. That will allow getting API reviews and testing by others. >> >> See above, I don’t think anything else was being asked for. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Lars >> >> , >> >> ___ >> Development mailing list >> Development@qt-project.org >> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development > > ___ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Qt 5.13 feature freeze is getting closer
>There were not concerns about code quality, :) was concerns about code styles >conventions, etc. All of these was fixed, only qdoc left to do You must be kidding... This is still a complete mess and definitely not ready for more than a playground. From: Development on behalf of Aleksey Kontsevich Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2019 1:03:55 PM To: Maurice Kalinowski; Lars Knoll; Thiago Macieira Cc: Qt development mailing list Subject: Re: [Development] Qt 5.13 feature freeze is getting closer >That is beside all the concerns about the quality of the code and missing >actions to fix these. There were not concerns about code quality, :) was concerns about code styles conventions, etc. All of these was fixed, only qdoc left to do. -- Best regards, Aleksey Linked in https://www.linkedin.com/in/alekseykontsevich 17.01.2019, 10:22, "Maurice Kalinowski" : > Well even for TP there should be some consensus on whether it should be part > of Qt or not, no? > > We are lacking documentation on the process here, all I could find was > https://wiki.qt.io/Creating_a_new_module_or_tool_for_Qt#Graduating_from_the_Playground. > > “This decision is done on the qt-development mailing list, based on the > technical and spirit fit to Qt, and it requires the approval of the Chief > Maintainer.” > > To my knowledge this has not happened at all. There was only a repository > request so far, none for integrating it into the product line. > > That is beside all the concerns about the quality of the code and missing > actions to fix these. > > Maurice > > From: Development On Behalf Of Lars Knoll > Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2019 8:56 PM > To: Thiago Macieira > Cc: Qt development mailing list > Subject: Re: [Development] Qt 5.13 feature freeze is getting closer > >> On 16 Jan 2019, at 19:54, Thiago Macieira wrote: >> >> On Wednesday, 16 January 2019 09:44:40 PST Aleksey Kontsevich wrote: >> >>> In Nov, there was long discussion in review: >>> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/240347/ Request was initially for >>> both: plugin and library - latter was transformed to Qt module. >> >> Given that this is a complete surprise, I don't think we can find enough time >> to do a review of it as a module in time for 5.13. > > As far as I understood it the request was for a TP status, not a fully > supported module. > >> In particular, I want to >> take a look to see how it can integrate with a project my team is working on: >> https://clearlinux.org/documentation/clear-linux/concepts/telemetry-about > > Why should that project influence a telemetry module for Qt? > >> So I think that for 5.13, the module can be at no higher state than >> experimental. That will allow getting API reviews and testing by others. > > See above, I don’t think anything else was being asked for. > > Cheers, > > Lars > > , > > ___ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
