KDE CI: Frameworks » kio » kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 - Build # 845 - Fixed!
BUILD SUCCESS Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/kio/job/kf5-qt5%20FreeBSDQt5.15/845/ Project: kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 Date of build: Sun, 06 Jun 2021 01:16:32 + Build duration: 8 min 0 sec and counting JUnit Tests Name: projectroot Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 59 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 59 test(s)Name: projectroot.autotests Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 6 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 6 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.ioslaves.trash Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.kpasswdserver Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)
Re: Re KIO workers
Hello, On Saturday, 5 June 2021 22:01:54 CEST David Faure wrote: > On samedi 5 juin 2021 21:07:39 CEST Kevin Ottens wrote: > > On Saturday, 5 June 2021 17:51:18 CEST David Faure wrote: > > > On samedi 5 juin 2021 16:29:10 CEST Volker Krause wrote: > > > > Do KIO slaves still need the klauncher/kinit loading mechanism? > > > > > > No. My request for developers to test KIO_FORK_SLAVES=1 > > > for daily use is so that apps fork kio worker processes directly, > > > without going via klauncher/kinit. BTW it seems to work fine. I wonder > > > if we should toggle that in 5.84, as part of the incremental move to the > > > KF6 world. > > > > Actually it works so well that I almost forgot I turned KIO_FORK_SLAVES > > on... > > I hope we're both wrong: the env var is *KDE*_FORK_SLAVES :) I forgot it so well that I got the variable wrong under the influence of your email. Yes, I got KDE_FORK_SLAVES enabled... went and check since you gave me a doubt. :-D Cheers. -- Kevin Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net enioka Haute Couture - proud patron of KDE, https://hc.enioka.com/en signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Deprecation wrappers for pre-KF6 time (was: Re: KF6 meeting notes 2021-06-05)
Am Samstag, 5. Juni 2021, 22:39:15 CEST schrieb Alexander Lohnau: > Or could we use the BUILD_DEPRECATED_SINCE variant in this case? Like we > already have to do with virtual methods. > > This way one would still be able to test it when compiling the framework > without deprecations. Existing API users will still be informed about the > deprecations by the compiler warnings. Using BUILD_DEPRECATED_SINCE with what will become the KF6 Beta version (i.e. the version where something will disappear in preparation for KF6) should be possible as well. The current way of testing that no hidden dependency by usages of deprecated-with-already-present-replacement API still exists, by building all KF libraries with DISABLE_DEPRECATED_BEFORE_AND_AT=CURRENT (or explicit version) should not be affected by this, as after all the macro should yield true for bigger versions. And the version-controlled deprecation warning macros could also be used with that BETA version (though we should then adapt any current usages of KF_DEPRECATED_WARNINGS_SINCE to not use 0x06, but the respective KF6 Beta version, to silence warnings for the stuff only deprecated without parallel replacement and replaced/dropped for the KF5 beta. Think e.g. as negative exapmple for what to avoid the useless warnings for QNetworkConfigurationManager, where we cannot do anything about while using Qt5 and have to do that extra work to tell the compiler to not warn for that class on our side. E.g. by the (broken) example I linked before: #if KPARTS_VERSION <= QT_VERSION_CHECK(5, 900, 0) # the 900 is broken #include #include #include #include #endif could instead be #if KPARTS_BUILD_DEPRECATED_SINCE(5, 190) # or whatever if KF6 Beta #include #include #include #include #endif On the other hand the term DEPRECATED could be confusing here, as nothing is really deprecated in the traditional sense., where something is tagged to be removed either because being unused or in favour of another now available approach. So this could be considered an abuse of those macros rather, and where things are already complex now they might get even more complex by that additional meaning. The BUILD_DEPRECATED_SINCE are there for being able to configure a build with or without, with a filter level by version even. Will that be needed for things which get fully replaced? I.e. will there be a transition time where both old & new are available? If not, I would make this rather a simple hard condition against the foreseen version where something will be replaced. Also, if X gets replaced by Y, that X is right now also used by other things often in the same module, so being able to completely build without X might not be doable. So the macro usage cannot even be tested properly. And things will only be found out when actually replacing X by Y (and Y might only be created in the process), so any wrapping beforehand does not really prepare anything for someone? Is there an example where things could be demoed/tested/experimented with? Cheers Friedrich
Re: Deprecation wrappers for pre-KF6 time (was: Re: KF6 meeting notes 2021-06-05)
Or could we use the BUILD_DEPRECATED_SINCE variant in this case? Like we already have to do with virtual methods. This way one would still be able to test it when compiling the framework without deprecations. Existing API users will still be informed about the deprecations by the compiler warnings. Regards Alex On Saturday, 5 June 2021 16:57:43 CEST Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote: > Am Samstag, 5. Juni 2021, 16:29:10 CEST schrieb Volker Krause: > > Deprecation wrappers macros: > > - should those also be added for things that have no replacement yet, or > > where the replacement will only become available for KF6? > > - trader queries is one such example (https://phabricator.kde.org/T14543) > > - so should we set the version to 6.0 for those instead? avoids leaking > > into KF6 by accident and doesn't block the usage of those macros > > elsewhere? > I propose to not use 6.0.0. but some beta-like version number, e.g. 5.190.0. > ((Beware, our use of the hexnumber version scheme 0xXXYYZZ limits the > individual numbers in the version to the range 0..255)). > Otherwise those macros will trigger only on release version bump time, which > would be too late. > > Now the challenge is to find a good minor version number for KF6 Betas :) > And have this properly documented, so people use the same working trigger > version. At least one place uses QT_VERSION_CHECK(5, 900, 0) which does not > do what we expect... > See https://invent.kde.org/frameworks/kparts/-/blob/master/src/ > partloader.cpp#L21 > (should be fixed in the process) > > Cheers > Friedrich (sadly no resources currently to help more with KF5->KF6)
Re: Re KIO workers
On samedi 5 juin 2021 21:07:39 CEST Kevin Ottens wrote: > Hello, > > On Saturday, 5 June 2021 17:51:18 CEST David Faure wrote: > > On samedi 5 juin 2021 16:29:10 CEST Volker Krause wrote: > > > Do KIO slaves still need the klauncher/kinit loading mechanism? > > > > No. My request for developers to test KIO_FORK_SLAVES=1 > > for daily use is so that apps fork kio worker processes directly, without > > going via klauncher/kinit. BTW it seems to work fine. I wonder if we > > should > > toggle that in 5.84, as part of the incremental move to the KF6 world. > > Actually it works so well that I almost forgot I turned KIO_FORK_SLAVES > on... I hope we're both wrong: the env var is *KDE*_FORK_SLAVES :) -- David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr Working on KDE Frameworks 5
Re: Re KIO workers
Hello, On Saturday, 5 June 2021 17:51:18 CEST David Faure wrote: > On samedi 5 juin 2021 16:29:10 CEST Volker Krause wrote: > > Do KIO slaves still need the klauncher/kinit loading mechanism? > > No. My request for developers to test KIO_FORK_SLAVES=1 > for daily use is so that apps fork kio worker processes directly, without > going via klauncher/kinit. BTW it seems to work fine. I wonder if we should > toggle that in 5.84, as part of the incremental move to the KF6 world. Actually it works so well that I almost forgot I turned KIO_FORK_SLAVES on... Regards. -- Kevin Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net enioka Haute Couture - proud patron of KDE, https://hc.enioka.com/en signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Re KIO workers
On Saturday, 5 June 2021 17:51:18 CEST David Faure wrote: > On samedi 5 juin 2021 16:29:10 CEST Volker Krause wrote: > > Do KIO slaves still need the klauncher/kinit loading mechanism? > > No. My request for developers to test KIO_FORK_SLAVES=1 > for daily use is so that apps fork kio worker processes directly, without > going via klauncher/kinit. BTW it seems to work fine. I wonder if we should > toggle that in 5.84, as part of the incremental move to the KF6 world. > > > or could > > that be replaced by json metadata based plugin loading as well? > > Err, that's an orthogonal question. That was meant regarding https://invent.kde.org/frameworks/kio/-/blob/master/src/ kioslave/kioslave.cpp#L73[1], similar to https://phabricator.kde.org/T13808[2]. But because SlaveBase is not a QObject we could not do this during KF5 times easily. It was just an idea :) > > When not going via klauncher/kinit, the app first launches the kioslave5 > process, which then loads the .so with the kio worker plugin. As you can > see from your process list: > > PREFIX/lib64/libexec/kf5/kioslave5 PREFIX/lib64/plugins/kf5/kio/file.so file > local:/run/user/1000/kded5ymjnPa.3.slave-socket > > That .so is determined by slave.cpp using > QString lib_path = KPluginLoader::findPlugin(_name); > which I believe means it finds the plugin by filename, no .protocol file > needed and no json metadata needed, right? > > > - is the performance benefit of kinit still relevant there? > > We decided it wasn't. For KIO workers it was never measured anyway. > > > - for in-process KIO that would be needed anyway > > That would remove the separate process (kioslave5) from the equation > but that's unrelated to plugin loading. Regards Alex [1] https://invent.kde.org/frameworks/kio/-/blob/master/src/kioslave/kioslave.cpp#L73 [2] https://phabricator.kde.org/T13808
KDE CI: Frameworks » kio » kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 - Build # 844 - Still Unstable!
BUILD UNSTABLE Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/kio/job/kf5-qt5%20FreeBSDQt5.15/844/ Project: kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 Date of build: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 16:09:08 + Build duration: 15 min and counting JUnit Tests Name: projectroot Failed: 2 test(s), Passed: 57 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 59 test(s)Failed: projectroot.autotests.applicationlauncherjob_forkingtestFailed: projectroot.autotests.applicationlauncherjob_servicetestName: projectroot.autotests Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 6 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 6 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.ioslaves.trash Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.kpasswdserver Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)
KDE CI: Frameworks » kio » kf5-qt5 SUSEQt5.15 - Build # 843 - Fixed!
BUILD SUCCESS Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/kio/job/kf5-qt5%20SUSEQt5.15/843/ Project: kf5-qt5 SUSEQt5.15 Date of build: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 16:09:08 + Build duration: 6 min 53 sec and counting BUILD ARTIFACTS acc/KF5KIO-5.83.0.xml JUnit Tests Name: (root) Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)Name: projectroot Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 60 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 60 test(s)Name: projectroot.autotests Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 6 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 6 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.ioslaves.trash Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.kpasswdserver Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s) Cobertura Report Project Coverage Summary Name PackagesFilesClassesLinesConditionalsCobertura Coverage Report68% (25/37)69% (292/426)69% (292/426)57% (37187/65021)41% (19345/46971)Coverage Breakdown by Package Name FilesClassesLinesConditionalsautotests95% (60/63)95% (60/63)91% (10626/11667)45% (5432/12164)autotests.http100% (5/5)100% (5/5)99% (503/504)65% (88/136)autotests.kcookiejar100% (1/1)100% (1/1)93% (165/177)70% (49/70)src100% (1/1)100% (1/1)89% (8/9)71% (10/14)src.core88% (107/121)88% (107/121)61% (8963/14688)52% (4542/8689)src.core.kssl100% (1/1)100% (1/1)40% (35/88)50% (3/6)src.filewidgets79% (30/38)79% (30/38)58% (5157/8842)46% (2362/5129)src.gui100% (9/9)100% (9/9)78% (738/950)59% (370/630)src.gui.systemd50% (2/4)50% (2/4)4% (7/173)1% (1/104)src.ioslaves.file100% (7/7)100% (7/7)56% (759/1344)40% (452/1118)src.ioslaves.file.kauth0% (0/2)0% (0/2)0% (0/179)0% (0/89)src.ioslaves.ftp100% (2/2)100% (2/2)47% (647/1363)37% (531/1420)src.ioslaves.help0% (0/5)0% (0/5)0% (0/248)0% (0/148)src.ioslaves.http88% (7/8)88% (7/8)42% (1783/4257)36% (1318/3642)src.ioslaves.http.kcookiejar40% (2/5)40% (2/5)47% (627/1325)56% (576/1035)src.ioslaves.remote100% (2/2)100% (2/2)25% (55/221)6%
KDE CI: Frameworks » kio » kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 - Build # 843 - Still Unstable!
BUILD UNSTABLE Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/kio/job/kf5-qt5%20FreeBSDQt5.15/843/ Project: kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 Date of build: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 15:47:40 + Build duration: 6 min 6 sec and counting JUnit Tests Name: projectroot Failed: 1 test(s), Passed: 58 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 59 test(s)Failed: projectroot.autotests.kiocore_kprotocolinfotestName: projectroot.autotests Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 6 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 6 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.ioslaves.trash Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.kpasswdserver Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)
KDE CI: Frameworks » kio » kf5-qt5 SUSEQt5.15 - Build # 842 - Still Unstable!
BUILD UNSTABLE Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/kio/job/kf5-qt5%20SUSEQt5.15/842/ Project: kf5-qt5 SUSEQt5.15 Date of build: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 15:45:52 + Build duration: 7 min 3 sec and counting BUILD ARTIFACTS acc/KF5KIO-5.83.0.xml JUnit Tests Name: (root) Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)Name: projectroot Failed: 1 test(s), Passed: 59 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 60 test(s)Failed: projectroot.autotests.kiocore_kprotocolinfotestName: projectroot.autotests Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 6 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 6 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.ioslaves.trash Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.kpasswdserver Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s) Cobertura Report Project Coverage Summary Name PackagesFilesClassesLinesConditionalsCobertura Coverage Report68% (25/37)69% (292/426)69% (292/426)57% (37179/65023)41% (19321/46973)Coverage Breakdown by Package Name FilesClassesLinesConditionalsautotests95% (60/63)95% (60/63)91% (10621/11668)45% (5416/12166)autotests.http100% (5/5)100% (5/5)99% (503/504)65% (88/136)autotests.kcookiejar100% (1/1)100% (1/1)93% (165/177)70% (49/70)src100% (1/1)100% (1/1)89% (8/9)71% (10/14)src.core88% (107/121)88% (107/121)61% (8955/14688)52% (4535/8689)src.core.kssl100% (1/1)100% (1/1)40% (35/88)50% (3/6)src.filewidgets79% (30/38)79% (30/38)58% (5162/8843)46% (2362/5129)src.gui100% (9/9)100% (9/9)78% (738/950)59% (370/630)src.gui.systemd50% (2/4)50% (2/4)4% (7/173)1% (1/104)src.ioslaves.file100% (7/7)100% (7/7)56% (759/1344)40% (452/1118)src.ioslaves.file.kauth0% (0/2)0% (0/2)0% (0/179)0% (0/89)src.ioslaves.ftp100% (2/2)100% (2/2)47% (647/1363)37% (531/1420)src.ioslaves.help0% (0/5)0% (0/5)0% (0/248)0% (0/148)src.ioslaves.http88% (7/8)88% (7/8)42% (1783/4257)36% (1318/3642)src.ioslaves.http.kcookiejar40% (2/5)40% (2/5)47% (627/1325)56% (576/1035)src.ioslaves.remote100% (2/2)100% (2/2)25%
Re KIO workers
On samedi 5 juin 2021 16:29:10 CEST Volker Krause wrote: > Do KIO slaves still need the klauncher/kinit loading mechanism? No. My request for developers to test KIO_FORK_SLAVES=1 for daily use is so that apps fork kio worker processes directly, without going via klauncher/kinit. BTW it seems to work fine. I wonder if we should toggle that in 5.84, as part of the incremental move to the KF6 world. > or could > that be replaced by json metadata based plugin loading as well? Err, that's an orthogonal question. When not going via klauncher/kinit, the app first launches the kioslave5 process, which then loads the .so with the kio worker plugin. As you can see from your process list: PREFIX/lib64/libexec/kf5/kioslave5 PREFIX/lib64/plugins/kf5/kio/file.so file local:/run/user/1000/kded5ymjnPa.3.slave-socket That .so is determined by slave.cpp using QString lib_path = KPluginLoader::findPlugin(_name); which I believe means it finds the plugin by filename, no .protocol file needed and no json metadata needed, right? > - is the performance benefit of kinit still relevant there? We decided it wasn't. For KIO workers it was never measured anyway. > - for in-process KIO that would be needed anyway That would remove the separate process (kioslave5) from the equation but that's unrelated to plugin loading. -- David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr Working on KDE Frameworks 5
KDE CI: Frameworks » kio » kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 - Build # 842 - Still Unstable!
BUILD UNSTABLE Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/kio/job/kf5-qt5%20FreeBSDQt5.15/842/ Project: kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 Date of build: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 15:39:32 + Build duration: 7 min 44 sec and counting JUnit Tests Name: projectroot Failed: 1 test(s), Passed: 58 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 59 test(s)Failed: projectroot.autotests.kiocore_kprotocolinfotestName: projectroot.autotests Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 6 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 6 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.ioslaves.trash Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.kpasswdserver Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)
KDE CI: Frameworks » kio » kf5-qt5 SUSEQt5.15 - Build # 841 - Unstable!
BUILD UNSTABLE Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/kio/job/kf5-qt5%20SUSEQt5.15/841/ Project: kf5-qt5 SUSEQt5.15 Date of build: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 15:39:32 + Build duration: 6 min 19 sec and counting BUILD ARTIFACTS acc/KF5KIO-5.83.0.xml JUnit Tests Name: (root) Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)Name: projectroot Failed: 1 test(s), Passed: 59 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 60 test(s)Failed: projectroot.autotests.kiocore_kprotocolinfotestName: projectroot.autotests Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 6 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 6 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.ioslaves.trash Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.kpasswdserver Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s) Cobertura Report Project Coverage Summary Name PackagesFilesClassesLinesConditionalsCobertura Coverage Report68% (25/37)69% (292/426)69% (292/426)57% (37174/65022)41% (19329/46973)Coverage Breakdown by Package Name FilesClassesLinesConditionalsautotests95% (60/63)95% (60/63)91% (10621/11668)45% (5421/12166)autotests.http100% (5/5)100% (5/5)99% (503/504)65% (88/136)autotests.kcookiejar100% (1/1)100% (1/1)93% (165/177)70% (49/70)src100% (1/1)100% (1/1)89% (8/9)71% (10/14)src.core88% (107/121)88% (107/121)61% (8955/14688)52% (4539/8689)src.core.kssl100% (1/1)100% (1/1)40% (35/88)50% (3/6)src.filewidgets79% (30/38)79% (30/38)58% (5157/8842)46% (2362/5129)src.gui100% (9/9)100% (9/9)78% (738/950)59% (370/630)src.gui.systemd50% (2/4)50% (2/4)4% (7/173)1% (1/104)src.ioslaves.file100% (7/7)100% (7/7)56% (759/1344)40% (452/1118)src.ioslaves.file.kauth0% (0/2)0% (0/2)0% (0/179)0% (0/89)src.ioslaves.ftp100% (2/2)100% (2/2)47% (647/1363)37% (531/1420)src.ioslaves.help0% (0/5)0% (0/5)0% (0/248)0% (0/148)src.ioslaves.http88% (7/8)88% (7/8)42% (1783/4257)36% (1318/3642)src.ioslaves.http.kcookiejar40% (2/5)40% (2/5)47% (627/1325)56% (576/1035)src.ioslaves.remote100% (2/2)100%
Deprecation wrappers for pre-KF6 time (was: Re: KF6 meeting notes 2021-06-05)
Am Samstag, 5. Juni 2021, 16:29:10 CEST schrieb Volker Krause: > Deprecation wrappers macros: > - should those also be added for things that have no replacement yet, or > where the replacement will only become available for KF6? > - trader queries is one such example (https://phabricator.kde.org/T14543) > - so should we set the version to 6.0 for those instead? avoids leaking into > KF6 by accident and doesn't block the usage of those macros elsewhere? I propose to not use 6.0.0. but some beta-like version number, e.g. 5.190.0. ((Beware, our use of the hexnumber version scheme 0xXXYYZZ limits the individual numbers in the version to the range 0..255)). Otherwise those macros will trigger only on release version bump time, which would be too late. Now the challenge is to find a good minor version number for KF6 Betas :) And have this properly documented, so people use the same working trigger version. At least one place uses QT_VERSION_CHECK(5, 900, 0) which does not do what we expect... See https://invent.kde.org/frameworks/kparts/-/blob/master/src/ partloader.cpp#L21 (should be fixed in the process) Cheers Friedrich (sadly no resources currently to help more with KF5->KF6)
KF6 meeting notes 2021-06-05
Hi all, here are the notes from today's KF6 weekly call: C++ 17 - can we use std::optional in public API? KPluginLoader has that need - we need to keep source compatibility with older KF5, so unconditional C++17 includes can be a problem during the remaining KF5 lifetime (but not for KF6) - should KPluginMetaData have an invalid state or only be wrapped in std::optional? we need the invalid state anyway for QVariant, so the former might be cleaner Deprecation wrappers macros: - should those also be added for things that have no replacement yet, or where the replacement will only become available for KF6? - trader queries is one such example (https://phabricator.kde.org/T14543) - adding them now would prevent bumping the minimum version ever again - so should we set the version to 6.0 for those instead? avoids leaking into KF6 by accident and doesn't block the usage of those macros elsewhere? Do KIO slaves still need the klauncher/kinit loading mechanism? or could that be replaced by json metadata based plugin loading as well? - is the performance benefit of kinit still relevant there? - for in-process KIO that would be needed anyway -> needs input from David F Plasma Framework plugin version check: can this be replaced by a simple namespace check? - does a detailed version check besides a check for matching version number, might not be needed anymore as the plugin API is stable - https://invent.kde.org/frameworks/plasma-framework/-/merge_requests/268 - would allow further cleanups of plugin macros in Plasma (https:// phabricator.kde.org/T14542) -> no longer needed and can be cleaned up Co-installability: - ksendbugmail is unversioned -> rename - protocol2json -> remove in kf6 KF6 Documentation: - Porting guide: we need to collect relevant porting information for this, but we currently have no place for this yet. - can we extract that from the deprecation documentation in KF5 source code? (such as https://invent.kde.org/frameworks/kio/-/blob/master/src/widgets/ krun.h#L196) -> Carl looks into this - where should we collect porting information? -> Frederik looks into this signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
KF6 weekly meeting
Hello; it's been a week already, and today Saturday, we're supposed to have an hour-long weekly meeting, 13 UTC (that's 15:00 CEST), the usual room on KDE's BigBlueButton: https://meet.kde.org/b/ada-mi8-aem See: https://community.kde.org/Frameworks#Meetings for more details Remeber the KF6 board https://phabricator.kde.org/project/board/310/ ? we're supposed to whittle it down if we want to actully, finally, branch for KF6, no rush, but it should hopefully happen at some point, preferably during our lifetimes. :) All are welcome to join, even if you just want to listen/see how things are done in KDE. Have a good day. -- Ahmad Samir
KDE CI: Frameworks » kio » kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 - Build # 841 - Still Unstable!
BUILD UNSTABLE Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/kio/job/kf5-qt5%20FreeBSDQt5.15/841/ Project: kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 Date of build: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 13:17:34 + Build duration: 9 min 15 sec and counting JUnit Tests Name: projectroot Failed: 1 test(s), Passed: 58 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 59 test(s)Failed: projectroot.autotests.applicationlauncherjob_forkingtestName: projectroot.autotests Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 6 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 6 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.ioslaves.trash Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.kpasswdserver Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)
KDE CI: Frameworks » plasma-framework » kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 - Build # 474 - Still Unstable!
BUILD UNSTABLE Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/plasma-framework/job/kf5-qt5%20FreeBSDQt5.15/474/ Project: kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 Date of build: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 09:29:57 + Build duration: 10 min and counting JUnit Tests Name: projectroot Failed: 1 test(s), Passed: 10 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 11 test(s)Failed: projectroot.autotests.plasma_iconitemtest
KDE CI: Frameworks » khtml » kf5-qt5 WindowsMSVCQt5.15 - Build # 44 - Fixed!
BUILD SUCCESS Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/khtml/job/kf5-qt5%20WindowsMSVCQt5.15/44/ Project: kf5-qt5 WindowsMSVCQt5.15 Date of build: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 08:54:56 + Build duration: 39 min and counting JUnit Tests Name: projectroot Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 2 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 2 test(s)
KDE CI: Frameworks » plasma-framework » kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 - Build # 473 - Still Unstable!
BUILD UNSTABLE Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/plasma-framework/job/kf5-qt5%20FreeBSDQt5.15/473/ Project: kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 Date of build: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 09:01:33 + Build duration: 28 min and counting JUnit Tests Name: projectroot Failed: 1 test(s), Passed: 10 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 11 test(s)Failed: projectroot.autotests.plasma_iconitemtest
KDE CI: Frameworks » kwayland » kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 - Build # 88 - Still Unstable!
BUILD UNSTABLE Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/kwayland/job/kf5-qt5%20FreeBSDQt5.15/88/ Project: kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 Date of build: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 09:00:05 + Build duration: 26 min and counting JUnit Tests Name: projectroot.autotests Failed: 12 test(s), Passed: 31 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 43 test(s)Failed: projectroot.autotests.client.kwayland_testCompositorFailed: projectroot.autotests.client.kwayland_testDataDeviceFailed: projectroot.autotests.client.kwayland_testDataSourceFailed: projectroot.autotests.client.kwayland_testRegionFailed: projectroot.autotests.client.kwayland_testShmPoolFailed: projectroot.autotests.client.kwayland_testSubCompositorFailed: projectroot.autotests.client.kwayland_testSubSurfaceFailed: projectroot.autotests.client.kwayland_testWaylandConnectionThreadFailed: projectroot.autotests.client.kwayland_testWaylandRegistryFailed: projectroot.autotests.client.kwayland_testWaylandShellFailed: projectroot.autotests.client.kwayland_testWaylandSurfaceFailed: projectroot.autotests.server.kwayland_testWaylandServerDisplay
KDE CI: Frameworks » kservice » kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 - Build # 134 - Fixed!
BUILD SUCCESS Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/kservice/job/kf5-qt5%20FreeBSDQt5.15/134/ Project: kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 Date of build: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 08:59:11 + Build duration: 18 min and counting JUnit Tests Name: projectroot Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 11 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 11 test(s)Name: projectroot.tests Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)
KDE CI: Frameworks » kio » kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 - Build # 840 - Unstable!
BUILD UNSTABLE Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/kio/job/kf5-qt5%20FreeBSDQt5.15/840/ Project: kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 Date of build: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 08:56:00 + Build duration: 17 min and counting JUnit Tests Name: projectroot Failed: 1 test(s), Passed: 58 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 59 test(s)Failed: projectroot.autotests.kiogui_openurljobtestName: projectroot.autotests Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 6 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 6 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.ioslaves.trash Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)Name: projectroot.src.kpasswdserver Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 1 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 1 test(s)
KDE CI: Frameworks » knewstuff » kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 - Build # 284 - Unstable!
BUILD UNSTABLE Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/knewstuff/job/kf5-qt5%20FreeBSDQt5.15/284/ Project: kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 Date of build: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 08:57:17 + Build duration: 14 min and counting JUnit Tests Name: projectroot Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 2 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 2 test(s)Name: projectroot.autotests Failed: 1 test(s), Passed: 2 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 3 test(s)Failed: projectroot.autotests.core.knewstuff_installationtest
KDE CI: Frameworks » kirigami » kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 - Build # 498 - Fixed!
BUILD SUCCESS Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/kirigami/job/kf5-qt5%20FreeBSDQt5.15/498/ Project: kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 Date of build: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 08:56:10 + Build duration: 10 min and counting JUnit Tests Name: projectroot.usr.home.jenkins.workspace.Frameworks.kirigami.kf5-qt5_FreeBSDQt515 Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 12 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 12 test(s)
KDE CI: Frameworks » kdav » kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 - Build # 59 - Fixed!
BUILD SUCCESS Build URL https://build.kde.org/job/Frameworks/job/kdav/job/kf5-qt5%20FreeBSDQt5.15/59/ Project: kf5-qt5 FreeBSDQt5.15 Date of build: Sat, 05 Jun 2021 08:52:28 + Build duration: 4 min 37 sec and counting JUnit Tests Name: projectroot Failed: 0 test(s), Passed: 6 test(s), Skipped: 0 test(s), Total: 6 test(s)
