Re: [Development] Nominating Konstantin Tokarev for Approver status

> On 5 Dec 2016, at 13:23, Allan Sandfeld Jensen wrote: > > Hi all, > > I just noticed Konstantin Tokarev who has been doing most of the development, > and practical maintenance of QtWebKit after it moved into "removed" state is > still missing reviewer status. I suggest

Re: [Development] Behaviour change in QML in Qt 5.8 regarding null

One of the reasons to use QVariant is that it's usually what is needed to connect a C++ signal to a QML function or to use invokeMethod, I could only ever get this to work by passing all arguments as QVariants. See for example:

Re: [Development] [QtMultimedia] Still is supported, active?

a flow of efforts toward a common goal. The project itself isn't responsible for fixing every issue or regression and there has to be a system of mutual benefit (usually ultimately involving money) to make things go forward. Food and coffee needs to go in the mouth of developers to produce those pa

Re: [Development] Is DirectFB dead?

> On 16 Mar 2016, at 09:13, Holger Freyther wrote: > >> Holger: do you know any more details about the project? Is it dead? Is there >> an active fork of it anywhere? Even archives of past releases? > > the FOSS development of DirectFB seems to be dead but I don't know the

Re: [Development] Approver status for Michal Klocek

+1 > On 08 Feb 2016, at 15:18, Blasche Alexander > wrote: > > Hello, > > I would like to nominate Michal Klocek for Approver status in the Qt Project. > Throughout the last year he has been working on QtLocation and QtWebEngine: > >

Re: [Development] RFF: nullptr rules

> On 09 Dec 2015, at 23:29, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > I'd like to propose this: > a) no massive replacement or clang-modernize, for the reasons Richard pointed > out > b) which means existing zeroes continue in sources and private headers > c) which means no

Re: [Development] Nominating Allan Jensen as maintainer for Qt WebEngine

+1 Cheers, Jocelyn > On 15 Oct 2015, at 11:25, Koehne Kai wrote: > > Hi, > > I hereby nominate Allan Jensen as the official maintainer for the Qt > WebEngine module. He's been the official maintainer for Qt WebKit already, > but nowadays works full time on Qt

Re: [Development] QML import versions

Hi, I always had that feeling too, that QML import versions are confusing if you don’t have any IDE to give you direct insight on what is available. If I put my user hat, I can see three reasons on why I’m usually fiddling with the import version: 1) Which major version of the plugin do I

Re: [Development] QML import versions

> On 20 Sep 2015, at 13:55, Filippo Cucchetto > wrote: > > I'm no troll, but i don't see any way to solve this without putting something > new to the table > > 1) What about extending the a little bit the QML language itself. > Something like > import QtQuick as

Re: [Development] QML import versions

> On 20 Sep 2015, at 19:34, Nurmi J-P <jpnu...@theqtcompany.com> wrote: > > Hi, > >> On 20 Sep 2015, at 15:35, Jocelyn Turcotte <jturco...@woboq.com> wrote: >> >> - It would be nice to be able to increase a module’s major version without &g

Re: [Development] Qt WebChannel 5.5 roadmap: WebEngine, QtWebView

On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 04:27:35PM +0200, Milian Wolff wrote: Hey all, for Qt 5.4, the new WebChannel module will only be easily usable for WebKit users. For 5.5 I plan to add WebEngine integration, if Pierre is not beating me to it. We will simply copy the QML API, and no changes on the

Re: [Development] crash when activating timers

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 08:37:06AM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote: On Wednesday 13 August 2014 17:07:16 Daniel Teske wrote: On Wednesday 13 Aug 2014 08:05:52 Thiago Macieira wrote: On Wednesday 13 August 2014 14:32:13 Ziller Eike wrote: So my question: Does anyone have any idea how this

Re: [Development] Proposal: All Qt modules must use the same version number

On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 08:58:58AM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote: Em seg 30 jun 2014, às 11:10:28, Jędrzej Nowacki escreveu: What about creating an intermodule api, which would stay private from a user point of view. We can agree on some rules, like for example not removing symbols between

Re: [Development] Nominating Milian Wolff as approver

On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 08:08:39PM +, Gladhorn Frederik wrote: Hi all, it’s my pleasure to nominate Milian Wolff as approver. He’s a great guy, works for KDAB and has done interesting work on profiling, improves KDevelop amongst other things and has been active with all things web it

Re: [Development] Rendering with different framerates into one scene

On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 03:49:21PM +0100, Christoph Kurz wrote: Now, if there is more than enough graphics power, ItemA and ItemB are rendered with 60fps; If there is just enough power, ItemA is rendered with 40fps, ItemB with 30fps. If there is not enough power for this, then ItemA could be

Re: [Development] Rendering with different framerates into one scene

On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 04:12:02PM +0100, Jocelyn Turcotte wrote: On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 03:49:21PM +0100, Christoph Kurz wrote: Now, if there is more than enough graphics power, ItemA and ItemB are rendered with 60fps; If there is just enough power, ItemA is rendered with 40fps, ItemB

Re: [Development] First Qt 4.8.6 snapshots available ...

Hello, those are only cherry-picks and are unrelated to WebSockets. Other than that WebKit in 4.8.6 only has a few bug fixes more than 4.8.5. The unofficial QtWebKit 2.3 release should have better support for the WebSockets RFC though: https://blogs.kde.org/2012/11/14/introducing-qtwebkit-23

Re: [Development] Nominating Michael Brüning as Approver

at 12:39:50PM +0100, Jocelyn Turcotte wrote: Hello, Michael has been working for Nokia since 2008 and joined the QtWebKit team in 2011, which he then followed in Digia. He has since then been contributing many changes to QtWebKit and has lately also been helping with QtWebEngine. here

[Development] Nominating Michael Brüning as Approver

Hello, Michael has been working for Nokia since 2008 and joined the QtWebKit team in 2011, which he then followed in Digia. He has since then been contributing many changes to QtWebKit and has lately also been helping with QtWebEngine. here are his dashboard and his contributions to upstream

Re: [Development] Making QScopedPointer scoped (again)

On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 11:44:58AM +0200, Stephen Kelly wrote: Em, what? I suppose you didn't read the patch. Am I correct? The patch *only* has an effect for people using C++11, where it is redundant because of std::unique_ptr. The original patch only tries to make QScopedPointer

Re: [Development] Making QScopedPointer scoped (again)

On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 12:07:09PM +0200, Stephen Kelly wrote: std::auto_ptr is very different to QScopedPointer. I'm no C++ master, so you might teach me something if you explain what you meant, but the only important difference I see between them is that QScopedPointer is non-copyable. This

Re: [Development] Unable to debug with Remote inspector

Hello, On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 01:28:29PM +0530, Amogh Kudari wrote: Debugging the issue further I am amble to see that its failing to launch remote inspector because its unable to find the inspector.html file. You're on your own if you're using an outdated trunk revision, especially

Re: [Development] OpenGL vs ANGLE - wiki page (what about performances?)

On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:35:31AM +, Koehne Kai wrote: Hi, When compiling Qt on windows you can choose between -angle and -desktop opengl . Which one to use can be a tricky question ... I started a wiki page to collect input, and already some people have contributed:

Re: [Development] kdelibs coding style

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 07:37:36AM -0600, Charley Bay wrote: Samuel sayeth: A good reason for using the Foo() : x(0) , y(0) { } syntax for initializer lists after all is to make diffs easier to read when adding or removing a member variable. The same argument could

Re: [Development] [QA] Suggestion -- Setting Up the Priority in JIRA

On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:05:31PM +0100, Mitch Curtis wrote: The idea of allowing everyone to set priorities for bugs originally sounded risky to me, but the more I think about and discuss the alternatives, the better it sounds. I'm going to propose something: I see your proposition, but I