On 31.5.2012 18.00, "Thiago Macieira" wrote:
On quinta-feira, 31 de maio de 2012 13.48.42, simo.f...@nokia.com wrote:
What kind of src packages people are looking for? There was some
discussion earlier about tarring each submodule separately, but somehow
I
got the impression that eventuall
It is not technically possible to do things on a per component basis.
-Original Message-
From: djsz...@archlinux.us [mailto:djsz...@archlinux.us] On Behalf Of ext
Laszlo Papp
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 4:19 AM
To: Keir Mark (Nokia-MP/Brisbane)
Cc: development@qt-project.org; j...@qt-pr
Friedemann Kleint said:
> Hi,
>
> after some polishing, then change has been merged as
> e7f1106edb1ac37d92d7851c44cd8d99f68eaaf4 .
> I have added some build instructions to
> http://qt-project.org/wiki/Building_Qt_5_from_Git for everyone to try out.
>
> We might decide later to add the library
I hope we can add ANGLE project as the third party.
Just for easy develop and build.
2012/5/31 Friedemann Kleint
> add the library to our 3rd-Party folder.
>
>
--
Please don't ask where I come from, It's a shame!
Best Regards
Yuchen
___
Development
> I personally believe that, the playground project maintainers should
> be able to get rights for this right away
Is it possible (technologically) for them to initially get these
rights only for their playground project (similarly how this happens
on Gerrit) ?
Best Regards,
Laszlo Papp
_
> That would require elevation to approver status via the normal multi week
> process or agreement on triager role criteria and elevation to that role.
I personally believe that, the playground project maintainers should
be able to get rights for this right away, like they do in case
Gerrit. They
5df103be25453280cdcf5807336546cbf833f133
2012-05-31_07-02-35
Configured:
./configure -opensource -release -confirm-license -prefix $PWD/qtbase
Build error:
+ cd qtwebkit && perl Tools/Scripts/build-webkit --qt --release --no-netscape-
plugin
Can't locate version.pm in @INC (@INC contains: /tmp/q
On quinta-feira, 31 de maio de 2012 13.48.42, simo.f...@nokia.com wrote:
> What kind of src packages people are looking for? There was some
> discussion earlier about tarring each submodule separately, but somehow I
> got the impression that eventually wasn't the one people wanted. Did I
> miss so
On quinta-feira, 31 de maio de 2012 13.50.42, lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote:
> Unfortunately it took a bit longer than I thought to get binary packages.
> So yes, an alpha 2 might not make as much sense anymore as we had hoped
> for.
The alpha 2 didn't require binary installers. I think we just dropp
> [...]
> For the packaging we still have some issues with Windows and Mac, but
> these should be possible to resolve. Iikka, Johanna and Simo have been
> working actively together and progress is good.
>
> PS. I also think there is no need for Alpha 2, it is better to aim full speed
> for
> the
On 31.5.2012 16.50, "lars.kn...@nokia.com" wrote:
>Unfortunately it took a bit longer than I thought to get binary packages.
>So yes, an alpha 2 might not make as much sense anymore as we had hoped
>for.
>
>Now that we have the packages, I think our main focus should be to get the
>beta out. Fro
Unfortunately it took a bit longer than I thought to get binary packages.
So yes, an alpha 2 might not make as much sense anymore as we had hoped
for.
Now that we have the packages, I think our main focus should be to get the
beta out. From the implementation side I think we're in an ok shape for
On 5/31/12 4:25 PM, "ext Thiago Macieira"
wrote:
>I'd say that if we have an alpha 2, it's this week. Or we don't release
>it at
>all and go straight for the beta.
>
>The current beta snapshot at [1] still has the alpha packaging -- one big
>source file.
What kind of src packages people are loo
I'd say that if we have an alpha 2, it's this week. Or we don't release it at
all and go straight for the beta.
The current beta snapshot at [1] still has the alpha packaging -- one big
source file. So I can't begin a beta testing, but I can an alpha one. I'll
start the build now and report how it
On May 31, 2012, at 12:41 PM, ext simo.f...@nokia.com wrote:
> Moi,
> I made some modifications to binary package publishing scripts. Now it should
> be easier to file bug reports with correct sha1. All packages, both source
> and binary installers, are now stored to
> http://releases.qt-projec
On quinta-feira, 31 de maio de 2012 15.22.53, Flex Ferrum wrote:
> In Qt 5 this option is already removed:
>
> QMAKE_CFLAGS= -nologo -Zm200 -Zc:wchar_t
>
> But Qt 4.8 still contains one.
Then the problem is solved.
We won't change Qt 4.8 now.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT)
In Qt 5 this option is already removed:
QMAKE_CFLAGS= -nologo -Zm200 -Zc:wchar_t
But Qt 4.8 still contains one.
Best regards,
Flex.
2012/5/31
> Sounds like something left over from the past. I agree that we should fix
> that for 5.0.
>
> Cheers,
> Lars
>
> On 5/31/12 12:46 PM, "ex
Sounds like something left over from the past. I agree that we should fix
that for 5.0.
Cheers,
Lars
On 5/31/12 12:46 PM, "ext Flex Ferrum" wrote:
>Hello all.
>
>Does anybody know why Qt still shipping with /Zwchar_t- flag for MSVC
>compilers (even for MSVC 2010)? It makes difficult to use Qt w
Hello all.
Does anybody know why Qt still shipping with /Zwchar_t- flag for MSVC
compilers (even for MSVC 2010)? It makes difficult to use Qt with other
third-party libraries (boost, for example) in one project.
Best regards,
Flex Ferrum
___
Development
Moi,
I made some modifications to binary package publishing scripts. Now it should
be easier to file bug reports with correct sha1. All packages, both source and
binary installers, are now stored to
http://releases.qt-project.org/qt5.0/beta-snapshots/ ( old locations will
remain for now)
Build
Hi,
after some polishing, then change has been merged as
e7f1106edb1ac37d92d7851c44cd8d99f68eaaf4 .
I have added some build instructions to
http://qt-project.org/wiki/Building_Qt_5_from_Git for everyone to try out.
We might decide later to add the library to our 3rd-Party folder.
Happy testing
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 12:44 PM, Laszlo Papp wrote:
>> We are planning to merge apps.formeego to maemo.org and
>> launch build.obs.maemo.org and maemo.org extras/extras-devel for Harmattan
>> for more centralized build and distribution.
>
> Err... What about the packages (>450) we already have in
On May 31, 2012, at 10:53 AM, ext Simon Hausmann wrote:
> On Thursday, May 31, 2012 11:47:23 AM ext Laszlo Papp wrote:
>>> Please re-use the existing port of Qt Quick Components to Qt 5 before
>>> starting a new effort.
>>
>> It is nice to have a branch, but why QtQuick 1.1 usages all around ?
>
> We are planning to merge apps.formeego to maemo.org and
> launch build.obs.maemo.org and maemo.org extras/extras-devel for Harmattan
> for more centralized build and distribution.
Err... What about the packages (>450) we already have in the community
repository ? Nobody came to the Community Rep
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> 2) What about the Application Store history ?
>
> Ovi: Applications could become a bit bigger than expected with
> involving the dependencies how we did with KDE back then. The
> necessitas developers established something, that might be wort
On Thursday, May 31, 2012 11:47:23 AM ext Laszlo Papp wrote:
> > Please re-use the existing port of Qt Quick Components to Qt 5 before
> > starting a new effort.
>
> It is nice to have a branch, but why QtQuick 1.1 usages all around ?
Because we wanted to keep the diff to master as small as possi
> Please re-use the existing port of Qt Quick Components to Qt 5 before starting
> a new effort.
It is nice to have a branch, but why QtQuick 1.1 usages all around ?
[...]
> Without such a mode a backgrounded application continues to consume a lot of
> GPU resources that won't be accessible for o
The upgrade was not expected to impact the assignment ability. That would
require elevation to approver status via the normal multi week process or
agreement on triager role criteria and elevation to that role.
The project you mention is the correct one.
On 31/05/2012, at 18:22, "ext Laszlo P
> The component lead cannot still assign bugs to others. Is this the
> matter of updating the system or we miss something ?
> https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTPLAYGROUND-1
The Jira upgrade did not make this work either.
> Please, if you have work requests, like the QTPLAYGROUND project
On Thursday, May 31, 2012 09:04:59 AM ext Alberto Mardegan wrote:
> On 05/30/2012 09:28 PM, Quim Gil wrote:
> > Question: do you believe there is a value in promoting an effort to port
> > those components here and now?
>
> Yes! While not perfect, these components are working generally well and
>
30 matches
Mail list logo
