Иван Комиссаров wrote:
> Still, what about policy not to use std:: classes in Qt API?
So why not just add a QOptional that works the same as std::optional?
Kevin Kofler
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-pro
On Thursday 14 January 2016 15:12:43 Rutledge Shawn wrote:
> > True, so the assumption is that Qt should compile on the 14.04 for now. It
> > doesn't mean that the provided Wayland will be used. I'm fine with that
> > :-)
Right, that's just a matter of a configure-time check and disable the modul
2016-01-14 15:39 GMT+01:00 Thiago Macieira :
> On Thursday 14 January 2016 10:15:40 Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
> > I guess the whole point of having Ubuntu 14.04 LTS in CI is to support
> that
> > platform as long as it is important. As you said it will be important
> until
> > 16.04 release. I think
2016-01-14 10:15 GMT+01:00 Jędrzej Nowacki :
> On Monday 11 of January 2016 00:27:08 Pier Luigi Fiorini wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > We are starting to have QtWayland patches that require at least Wayland
> 1.6
> > available, such as:
> >
> > - https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/104222/
> > - https:/
> On 14 Jan 2016, at 16:05, Jędrzej Nowacki
> wrote:
>
> On Thursday 14 of January 2016 06:39:29 Thiago Macieira wrote:
>> On Thursday 14 January 2016 10:15:40 Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
>>> I guess the whole point of having Ubuntu 14.04 LTS in CI is to support
>>> that
>>>
>>> platform as long as
On Thursday 14 of January 2016 06:39:29 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Thursday 14 January 2016 10:15:40 Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
> > I guess the whole point of having Ubuntu 14.04 LTS in CI is to support
> > that
> >
> > platform as long as it is important. As you said it will be important
> > until
On Thursday 14 January 2016 10:15:40 Jędrzej Nowacki wrote:
> I guess the whole point of having Ubuntu 14.04 LTS in CI is to support that
> platform as long as it is important. As you said it will be important until
> 16.04 release. I think we could potentially remove 14.04 from CI on dev
> branch
On 14/01/16 14:54, "Development on behalf of Marc Mutz"
wrote:
>On Thursday 14 January 2016 12:58:21 Keränen Pasi wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> As Lars mentioned in his email on KDE Free Qt foundation agreement and
>> changes, we’re pushing source of Qt Charts and Qt DataVisualization to
>> codereview
On Thursday 14 January 2016 12:58:21 Keränen Pasi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As Lars mentioned in his email on KDE Free Qt foundation agreement and
> changes, we’re pushing source of Qt Charts and Qt DataVisualization to
> codereview.
What's the state of BC/SC promises on those? Ie. are we free to review
+1
From: Development [mailto:development-boun...@qt-project.org] On Behalf Of
Keränen Pasi
Sent: torstaina 14. tammikuuta 2016 13.58
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: [Development] Charts and DataVis (New KDE Free Qt Foundation Agreement
and Changes)
Hi,
As Lars mentioned in his email on
Hi,
As Lars mentioned in his email on KDE Free Qt foundation agreement and changes,
we’re pushing source of Qt Charts and Qt DataVisualization to codereview.
I’d like to propose these two modules to be taken as part of Qt add-on modules,
they have been part of commercial Qt releases for some t
On Monday 11 of January 2016 00:27:08 Pier Luigi Fiorini wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We are starting to have QtWayland patches that require at least Wayland 1.6
> available, such as:
>
> - https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/104222/
> - https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/112141/
> - https://codereview.
On 14/01/16 08:49, "Development on behalf of Andreas Aardal Hanssen"
wrote:
>2016-01-13 12:15 GMT+01:00 Knoll Lars :
>
>Hi everybody,
>The Qt Company has over the last days signed a new and updated agreement with
>the KDE Free Foundation. With this new agreement come some adjustments to the
13 matches
Mail list logo
