Re: [Development] [Releasing] HEADS-UP: Branching from 'dev' to '5.8' ongoing, Qt 5.8 Feature Freeze coming...

Hi, I totally support Kai's request. On the upside: The qtlocation build is fixed :) Simon From: Development on behalf of Kai Koehne Sent: Friday, August 12, 2016 3:03:18 PM To:

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

On sexta-feira, 12 de agosto de 2016 14:03:24 PDT Gunnar Roth wrote: > Does a request of having qtquickcontrols2 and qtvirtualkeyboard 2.1 > backported to 5.6. x have chance? Actually I managed to do this myself, but > an upstream solutuion is preferrable. The problem is that some important OS >

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

On sexta-feira, 12 de agosto de 2016 14:00:10 PDT Marc Mutz wrote: > Well, we told people "look, Qt 5.7 will drop support for your platform, and > require C++11, but don't worry: you have 5.6 LTS". I doubt those people > would be happy if they didn't get their bugs fixed because they don't >

Re: [Development] [Releasing] HEADS-UP: Branching from 'dev' to '5.8' ongoing, Qt 5.8 Feature Freeze coming...

May I kindly ask why PDF shall now be disabled on embedded systems? Best regards, Alexander Nassian > Am 12.08.2016 um 15:03 schrieb Kai Koehne : > > Hi, > > Unfortunately, we're having great difficulties to get patches integrated into > Qt WebEngine in the last days, right

Re: [Development] [Releasing] HEADS-UP: Branching from 'dev' to '5.8' ongoing, Qt 5.8 Feature Freeze coming...

Hi, Unfortunately, we're having great difficulties to get patches integrated into Qt WebEngine in the last days, right now due to qtlocation not compiling (QTBUG-55229). Unless the situation resolves itself over the weekend, I'd like to ask for an exception for getting features into 5.8 for Qt

Re: [Development] New repository for QtOAuth

On 12 August 2016 at 11:40, Fredrik de Vibe wrote: > Hi all, > > We have recently been working on an implementation of OAuth (1+2), and > this is now approaching a state in which it can be distributed as a tech > preview. For this we'll need a new public repository. > >

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

Does a request of  having qtquickcontrols2 and qtvirtualkeyboard 2.1 backported to 5.6. x have chance? Actually I managed to do this myself, but an upstream solutuion is preferrable. The problem is that some important OS is no longer supported in 5.7.   Regards, Gunnar     Gesendet: 

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

On Friday 12 August 2016 13:18:52 Lars Knoll wrote: > > On 12 Aug 2016, at 12:01, Olivier Goffart wrote: > > > > > > On Freitag, 12. August 2016 10:52:52 CEST Marc Mutz wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> > >> > >> I'd like to know what the rules are supposed to for submitting to 5.6 >

Re: [Development] New repository for QtOAuth

+1. Lars > On 12 Aug 2016, at 12:40, Fredrik de Vibe wrote: > > Hi all, > > We have recently been working on an implementation of OAuth (1+2), and this > is now approaching a state in which it can be distributed as a tech preview. > For this we'll need a new public

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

> On 12 Aug 2016, at 12:01, Olivier Goffart wrote: > > On Freitag, 12. August 2016 10:52:52 CEST Marc Mutz wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'd like to know what the rules are supposed to for submitting to 5.6 (LTS). >> >> Should we enforce the strict rules of other minor releases (only

[Development] New repository for QtOAuth

Hi all, We have recently been working on an implementation of OAuth (1+2), and this is now approaching a state in which it can be distributed as a tech preview. For this we'll need a new public repository. The main reason for OAuth to reside in its own module (and not as a part of

Re: [Development] Adding 3rdpary libraries to QtSerialBus

> Am 11.08.2016 um 22:22 schrieb Thiago Macieira : > > On quinta-feira, 11 de agosto de 2016 19:50:35 PDT Alexander Nassian wrote: >>> And they're LGPLv2. The v3 clauses cause lots of companies to run away. >> >> Really? v3 just clarifies some of the implications of v2

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

On Freitag, 12. August 2016 10:52:52 CEST Marc Mutz wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to know what the rules are supposed to for submitting to 5.6 (LTS). > > Should we enforce the strict rules of other minor releases (only regressions > and P2+)? > > IMHO, 5.6 is not like 5.5. So with another 2+ years

Re: [Development] Adding 3rdpary libraries to QtSerialBus

12.08.2016, 07:32, "Alexander Nassian" : > Interesting enough that Qt itself switched the OSS license to v3 ... Don't mix up changing license of your project to more restrictive with using restrictively licensed 3rd party libraries. > >>  Am 11.08.2016 um 22:22

Re: [Development] Adding 3rdpary libraries to QtSerialBus

Hi Denis, I've already have a prototype parsing the sysfs. It has no dependencies, consists of less than 100 lines code and determines the SocketCAN interfaces, checks if an interface is virtual and if the interface is CAN FD capable. You will be able to review it soon :) Best regards,

[Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

Hi, I'd like to know what the rules are supposed to for submitting to 5.6 (LTS). Should we enforce the strict rules of other minor releases (only regressions and P2+)? IMHO, 5.6 is not like 5.5. So with another 2+ years of 5.6 lifetime, more relaxed rules should apply. I'd like all bug-fixes