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

On Wednesday 07 September 2016 10:26:44 Olivier Goffart wrote: >> The reason we should limit the changes to critical change is so than >> "jumping through hoops" gets easier. Every patch we put there instead >> of in a upper branch makes more work of merging, handling regressions >> causing by

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

> -Original Message- > From: Development [mailto:development- > bounces+tuukka.turunen=qt...@qt-project.org] On Behalf Of Stottlemyer, > Brett (B.S.) > Sent: keskiviikkona 7. syyskuuta 2016 14.56 > To: development@qt-project.org > Subject: Re: [Development] Which

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

On 9/7/16, 4:26 AM, "Development on behalf of Olivier Goffart" wrote: >But in the end, we want our users to upgrade. So they >can reconsider the reason they cannot upgrade while weighing the new features/

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

On Wednesday 07 September 2016 10:26:44 Olivier Goffart wrote: > On Dienstag, 16. August 2016 10:48:27 CEST Marc Mutz wrote: > > On Tuesday 16 August 2016 10:06:09 Olivier Goffart wrote: > > > On Freitag, 12. August 2016 09:02:08 CEST Thiago Macieira wrote: > > [...] > > > > > > I agree with

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

On Dienstag, 16. August 2016 10:48:27 CEST Marc Mutz wrote: > On Tuesday 16 August 2016 10:06:09 Olivier Goffart wrote: > > On Freitag, 12. August 2016 09:02:08 CEST Thiago Macieira wrote: > [...] > > > > I agree with Marc, we should allow fixing bugs besides those that are > > > critical or

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

On fredag 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+)? I strongly believe that autotests improvements should go to

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

On Tuesday 16 August 2016 10:06:09 Olivier Goffart wrote: > On Freitag, 12. August 2016 09:02:08 CEST Thiago Macieira wrote: [...] > > I agree with Marc, we should allow fixing bugs besides those that are > > critical or regressions. Even the regression category will change: once > > 5.6 is a year

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

On Freitag, 12. August 2016 09:02:08 CEST Thiago Macieira wrote: > 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 > >

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

On sábado, 13 de agosto de 2016 20:30:39 PDT Gunnar Roth wrote: > >> b. adding EditorFont to qplatformtheme.h enumeration ,has also no risk. > > > > Not allowed per Qt API compatibility promise: code compiled with Qt 5.6.x > > must run just fine with Qt 5.6.y even if y < x. > > Well thats

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

Hi Thiago, thanks for you answers. > Am 13.08.2016 um 20:05 schrieb Thiago Macieira : > > On sábado, 13 de agosto de 2016 18:08:16 PDT Gunnar Roth wrote: >> 1. category is just adding code, which does not influence current >> code. >> a. adding qAsConst in qgolbal.h.

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

On sábado, 13 de agosto de 2016 18:08:16 PDT Gunnar Roth wrote: > 1. category is just adding code, which does not influence current > code. > a. adding qAsConst in qgolbal.h. That is actually something i really > like to have in qt 5.6, because it is very useful and has no risk. Except that

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

Hi Thiago, to make qt 5.6.x support the quick controls2 there are only a few changes needed. 1. category is just adding code, which does not influence current code. a. adding qAsConst in qgolbal.h. That is actually something i really like to have in qt 5.6, because it is very useful and has

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] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

: Freitag, 12. August 2016 um 13:18 Uhr Von: "Lars Knoll" <lars.kn...@qt.io> An: "Olivier Goffart" <oliv...@woboq.com> Cc: "Qt development mailing list" <development@qt-project.org> Betreff: Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6? &

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] 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

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