Re: [Development] [Qt-creator] [FYI] the new way to retarget gerrit changes

08.01.2018, 16:51, "Orgad Shaneh" : > On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 3:48 PM, Konstantin Tokarev wrote: > >> 08.01.2018, 16:40, "Oswald Buddenhagen" : >>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 02:39:57PM +0300, Orgad Shaneh wrote: Either extend the sanity bot, or create a new bot, which listens on g

Re: [Development] [Qt-creator] [FYI] the new way to retarget gerrit changes

On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 3:48 PM, Konstantin Tokarev wrote: > > > 08.01.2018, 16:40, "Oswald Buddenhagen" : > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 02:39:57PM +0300, Orgad Shaneh wrote: > >> Either extend the sanity bot, or create a new bot, which listens on > >> gerrit's event stream. > >> If the

Re: [Development] [Qt-creator] [FYI] the new way to retarget gerrit changes

08.01.2018, 16:40, "Oswald Buddenhagen" : > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 02:39:57PM +0300, Orgad Shaneh wrote: >> Either extend the sanity bot, or create a new bot, which listens on >> gerrit's event stream. >> If the change's owner (or an approver?) posts a comment reading "Please >>

Re: [Development] [FYI] the new way to retarget gerrit changes

> On 8 Jan 2018, at 14:40, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 02:39:57PM +0300, Orgad Shaneh wrote: >> Either extend the sanity bot, or create a new bot, which listens on >> gerrit's event stream. >> If the change's owner (or an approver?) posts a comment reading "Please

[Development] [FYI] the new way to retarget gerrit changes

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 02:39:57PM +0300, Orgad Shaneh wrote: >Either extend the sanity bot, or create a new bot, which listens on >gerrit's event stream. >If the change's owner (or an approver?) posts a comment reading "Please >retarget ", run your script on the server side. You ne

Re: [Development] About the presence of /System/Library/Frameworks/Carbon.framework

Konstantin Tokarev wrote: >> It does sound like we're a little too enthusiastic about jumping to a >> conclusion here - is there a better way to decide what we're compiling >> for ? Surely we should ignore uname if configure has options that >> explicitly ask for cross-compilation; but it's a reas

Re: [Development] 32bit linux build of qt5.10.0 w/ webengine

> >> For me, it's quite simple: >> No (opensource/commercial) Qt CI = No (opensource/commercial) Qt >> binaries = No (opensource/commercial) support. > > No CI, see above. > No binaries, build from sources. > No support, sorry, I can't comment. Just a quick comment from TQtC’s perspective on thi

Re: [Development] Dropping of MSVC 2013

FYI As per https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/205305/ MSVC2013 is no longer in the CI. -- Alex ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development