On sexta-feira, 28 de setembro de 2012 00.54.34, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> > They are:
> > - dev: unfrozen branch, containing alpha-quality[*] code that is ready to
> > go>
> >into beta testing at any time
>
> What is the reason for calling this "dev" instead of "master" which is
> more common for
At lease, I think the 'dev' is not a good name for remote branch.
Does it mean the other branch is in no--active-developing state?
I prefer using 'feature' instead. All the new feature should go 'feature'
branch.
and the 'stable' is only bug fix branch.
2012/9/28 Lincoln Ramsay
> Luckily we use
On 28/09/12 14:37, Loaden wrote:
I prefer:
dev -> next
stable -> master
release -> release
Clearly they should be named after a traffic light:
green - commit away
orange - be careful (keep it stable)
red - don't commit
Luckily we use git so you can give the branches any name you want on
yo
I prefer:
dev -> next
stable -> master
release -> release
>next
-->master
-->release
2012/9/28 Laszlo Papp
> > They are:
> > - dev: unfrozen branch, containing alpha-quality[*] code that is ready
> to go
> >into beta t
> They are:
> - dev: unfrozen branch, containing alpha-quality[*] code that is ready to go
>into beta testing at any time
What is the reason for calling this "dev" instead of "master" which is
more common for developers, and it would not have an impact on the
submitted changes to gerrit even
On Thursday September 27 2012, Simon Hausmann wrote:
> On Thursday, September 27, 2012 09:08:52 AM João Abecasis wrote:
> > Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > > But note that there's one stricter requirement: the forwards
> > > compatibility that applies within a patch series. Adding this new
> > > virtual
> Can you do what it says?
I have spent a couple of hours with figuring this problem out, and it
seems the following change in qmake has made the build policy about
errors stricter:
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,35183
I think this change is actually a good idea, so I do not blame Ossi
On quinta-feira, 27 de setembro de 2012 18.37.18, Thomas Senyk wrote:
> Their is a naming convention for mkspecs ... not sure how it's definition
> looks exactly, but it should be named: linux-imx6-g++
No, it shouldn't. It should be linux-g++-imx6. There are several sections of
the .pro files that
On Thu, September 27, 2012 05:11:23 PM Christoph Kurz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a problem cross compiling the Qt5-Beta for an i.MX6 Board.
> The host OS is a Fedora Linux, the target OS is an embedded Linux.
>
> Steps taken so far:
>
> – I set up LTIB and created a rootfs for the target.
>
> – I
On quinta-feira, 27 de setembro de 2012 11.51.16, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Two weeks old tarball finally worked from master, but it is now broken
> again when processing the arm.pro (?). See the details here:
> https://build.pub.meego.com/package/live_build_log?arch=armv7el&package=qt5-
> base&
Hi,
I have a problem cross compiling the Qt5-Beta for an i.MX6 Board.
The host OS is a Fedora Linux, the target OS is an embedded Linux.
Steps taken so far:
– I set up LTIB and created a rootfs for the target.
– I downloaded the Qt5 sourcecode and excluded svg and webkit by renaming the
corresp
> git bisect --run should help. It works unattended if you have a test case
> that
> you check with a shell script, and spits out the commit that introduced the
> regression.
>
Yes, I know bisect. It is unfortunately still too much work for my current
schedule, but thank you anyway.
I will have t
On Thursday September 27 2012, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Two weeks old tarball finally worked from master, but it is now broken
> again when processing the arm.pro (?). See the details here:
> https://build.pub.meego.com/package/live_build_log?arch=armv7el&package=qt5
>-base&project=home%3Arzr%3
Hi,
On 27 September 2012 11:56, List for announcements regarding Qt
releases and development wrote:
> A security vulnerability has been discovered in the SSL/TLS protocol, which
> affects connections using compression.
> All versions of TLS are believed to be affected.
> To address this, Qt will
A security vulnerability has been discovered in the SSL/TLS protocol, which
affects connections using compression.
All versions of TLS are believed to be affected.
To address this, Qt will disable TLS compression by default.
* How does the attack work?
If the attacker can insert data into the SS
Hi,
Two weeks old tarball finally worked from master, but it is now broken
again when processing the arm.pro (?). See the details here:
https://build.pub.meego.com/package/live_build_log?arch=armv7el&package=qt5-base&project=home%3Arzr%3Aharmattan&repository=MeeGo_1.2_Harmattan_Maemo.org_MeeGo_1.2
Awesome work guys :)
One possible request: entry marking in the source reports, ie:
QString QMimeType::filterString() const
From:
http://download.froglogic.com/public/qt5-squishcoco-report/libQtWidgets/source_147.html
Was the test entered but the if lines not tested?
Another example: void QMime
> Would you include add-ons in the reports too?
Actually we start with QtBase. Of course in the future,
the goal is to provide an analysis on the whole Qt source.
> Anyway to get run output logs from failed tests?
Good suggestion, will be present in the next daily coverage report.
Sébastien
__
On 27/09/12 04:06, Harri Porten wrote:
> Hi!
>
> We started publishing code coverage results of Qt 5 unit test runs as
> produced by our tool Squish Coco:
>
> http://download.froglogic.com/public/qt5-squishcoco-report/ (results)
>
> http://download.froglogic.com/public/effectively-testing-
> Overall the coverage was less than I expected, so I started reading the
> source files list starting from lowest coverage and found some surprising
>results, e.g. qmimedata.cpp 0% coverage, qsettings.cpp nearly 0%
> coverage although I know there are tests for these.
> In the execution list at
>
On Thursday, September 27, 2012 09:08:52 AM João Abecasis wrote:
> Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > But note that there's one stricter requirement: the forwards compatibility
> > that applies within a patch series. Adding this new virtual within the
> > same
> > patch series means a new, public symbol, w
Harri Porten said:
> Hi!
>
> We started publishing code coverage results of Qt 5 unit test runs as
> produced by our tool Squish Coco:
>
>http://download.froglogic.com/public/qt5-squishcoco-report/ (results)
>
> http://download.froglogic.com/public/effectively-testing-qt5-using-squishcoc
On Wednesday 26. September 2012 20.06.21 Harri Porten wrote:
> Feedback of any kind is welcome.
Nice!
Jędrek
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Thiago Macieira wrote:
> But note that there's one stricter requirement: the forwards compatibility
> that applies within a patch series. Adding this new virtual within the same
> patch series means a new, public symbol, which could get used in applications.
I don't know how to fix this, but is th
24 matches
Mail list logo
