[Development] CI for Qt WebKit

Hi, we’re planning on doing a slight adjustments to how Qt WebKit and other unsupported modules are CI tested for 5.7 and onwards. Basically, they will not be tested as part of qt5.git integrations anymore and thus won’t block releases. But they will stay CI controlled and will be compile

Re: [Development] QtQuick Call for Maintainer

On 05/04/16 22:56, "Development on behalf of Giuseppe D'Angelo" <development-bounces+lars.knoll=theqtcompany@qt-project.org on behalf of giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com> wrote: >Il 10/03/2016 08:37, Knoll Lars ha scritto: >>> > >>> >Individually or tog

Re: [Development] Changing definition of Qt meta macro to allow tools integration

On 31/03/16 20:33, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira" <development-bounces+lars.knoll=theqtcompany@qt-project.org on behalf of thiago.macie...@intel.com> wrote: >On quinta-feira, 31 de março de 2016 08:01:54 PDT Knoll Lars wrote: >> >Why would

Re: [Development] Changing definition of Qt meta macro to allow tools integration

On 31/03/16 08:38, "Development on behalf of Olivier Goffart" wrote: >Am Mittwoch, 30. März 2016, 21:04:50 CEST schrieb Thiago Macieira: >> On quinta-feira, 31 de março de 2016 00:10:48 PDT Olivier

Re: [Development] Nominating Volker Krause for Approver status

He isn’t yet? In that case, a big +1 from me :) Cheers, Lars From: Development > on behalf of Richard Moore > Date: Wednesday

Re: [Development] Qt Coding Guidelines

On 18/03/16 16:44, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira" wrote: >On sexta-feira, 18 de março de 2016 10:46:41 PDT Koehne Kai wrote: >> > It remains that this document is expected to be

Re: [Development] Qt Coding Guidelines

I’m all for an automated solution for code formatting, so we can remove discussions/comments about wrongly placed braces or spaces from code review and can rather focus more on the content. But there will be still a need for some coding guidelines in other places (like auto usage, foreach and

Re: [Development] Qt Coding Guidelines

On 17/03/16 00:14, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira" <development-bounces+lars.knoll=theqtcompany@qt-project.org on behalf of thiago.macie...@intel.com> wrote: >On quarta-feira, 16 de março de 2016 21:43:00 PDT Knoll Lars wrote: >> Good initiative. I thi

Re: [Development] Qt Coding Guidelines

On 18/03/16 16:03, "Development on behalf of Marc Mutz" wrote: >On Friday 18 March 2016 15:37:40 André Somers wrote: >> Op 18/03/2016 om 09:24 schreef Rutledge Shawn: >> > Forcing it on everyone

Re: [Development] Qt Coding Guidelines

Good initiative. I think this is the right idea. Let's put the coding guidelines into .qdoc files after having a decision on the ML. We should actually consider having a section about contributing to Qt in our documentation. Coding guidelines would fit nicely into that. But I think the .qdoc

Re: [Development] RFD: Removing environment variable support from configure

Yes, let's drop this. Btw, I'm currently anyway working on changing how configuration handling is done for Qt, so there will be some changes in this area coming for Qt 5.8. Cheers, Lars On 17/03/16 21:45, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira"

Re: [Development] [Releasing] Qt 5.6.0 (final) packages available

That’s unfortunate, but the fix for this one will have to wait for 5.6.1 as well. Cheers, Lars On 15/03/16 15:35, "Releasing on behalf of Hernan Martinez via Releasing" wrote: >Hello. >

Re: [Development] Fwd: [Interest] Qt 5.6.0 (final) packages available

On 15/03/16 09:54, "Development on behalf of Helio Chissini de Castro" wrote: >I agreed partially with Lars > > >Is too late *now*, and we can wait for a quick 5.6.1, but is not entirely >correct in

Re: [Development] QtQuick Call for Maintainer

On 10/03/16 08:18, "Development on behalf of Alan Alpert" wrote: >On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 1:56 AM, Frederik Gladhorn > wrote: >> We are in the luxury position

Re: [Development] Is it possible to make QSettingsPrivate::variantToString and its pair a public interface?

Hi, While I understand that this would help you, I don’t think this is a good idea. QSettings has is’s share of implementation issues, and would at some point benefit from cleaning up or (more likely) rewriting the internals. I wouldn’t want to add to it’s public API right now, as that would

Re: [Development] QtQuick Call for Maintainer

Hi Alan, Thanks a lot for your work on Qt Quick over the years. Let's see who can take over this role, let me/us know if you have an interest and feel qualified. Cheers, Lars On 06/03/16 08:40, "Development on behalf of Alan Alpert"

Re: [Development] Are we free of code that checks this isn't null?

On 04/03/16 08:59, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira" wrote: >On sexta-feira, 4 de março de 2016 09:58:53 PST Marc Mutz wrote: >> On Friday 04 March 2016 07:52:15 Thiago Macieira

Re: [Development] How can Qt 5.6.0 MinGW pass in CI with QTBUG-49971 open?

On 03/03/16 10:25, "Development on behalf of Curtis Mitch" wrote: > > >> -Original Message- >> From: Development [mailto:development- >>

Re: [Development] Dropping qtserialbus from Qt 5.6 -- it doesn't compile in C++98

On 03/03/16 09:35, "Olivier Goffart" <oliv...@woboq.com> wrote: >Am Donnerstag, 3. März 2016, 08:24:41 CET schrieb Knoll Lars: >> On 03/03/16 09:12, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira" >> <development-bounces+lars.knoll=theqtcompany

Re: [Development] Dropping qtserialbus from Qt 5.6 -- it doesn't compile in C++98

On 03/03/16 09:12, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira" <development-bounces+lars.knoll=theqtcompany@qt-project.org on behalf of thiago.macie...@intel.com> wrote: >On quinta-feira, 3 de março de 2016 08:05:41 PST Knoll Lars wrote: >> This looks good. > &g

Re: [Development] Dropping qtserialbus from Qt 5.6 -- it doesn't compile in C++98

On 03/03/16 08:54, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira" <development-bounces+lars.knoll=theqtcompany@qt-project.org on behalf of thiago.macie...@intel.com> wrote: >On quinta-feira, 3 de março de 2016 07:50:51 PST Knoll Lars wrote: >> >It matters

Re: [Development] Dropping qtserialbus from Qt 5.6 -- it doesn't compile in C++98

On 03/03/16 08:31, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira" wrote: >On quinta-feira, 3 de março de 2016 07:05:10 PST Heikkinen Jani wrote: >> Hi, >> >> QtSerialBus is a technology

Re: [Development] 5.7 feature freeze

rev Nurmi J-P: >> Hi Lars, >> >>> On 27. jan. 2016, at 09.30, Knoll Lars <lars.kn...@theqtcompany.com> wrote: >>> >>> If anybody else has a feature he believes absolutely has to make it to 5.7, >>> get it done until Monday or talk to me :) >>

Re: [Development] Dropping VS 2012 in Qt 5.7

I don't have big objections to that neither, given that MS isn't going forward with WEC2013. At the same time I wonder if it gives us a lot, as 5.7 is already in feature freeze. The main advantage would be on the CI side where we could drop the compiler. Cheers, Lars On 25/02/16 17:20,

Re: [Development] We are planning to upgrade qdoc to use clang for parsing C++

On 25/02/16 18:02, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira" wrote: >On quinta-feira, 25 de fevereiro de 2016 17:33:52 PST Cristian Adam wrote: >> This might be a burden for some of the Qt

Re: [Development] Supported platforms for Qt 5.8rt

On 21/02/16 19:01, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira" wrote: >On domingo, 21 de fevereiro de 2016 07:01:57 PST Turunen Tuukka wrote: >> > Thiago Macieira

Re: [Development] Supported platforms for Qt 5.8

On 22/02/16 19:32, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira" wrote: >On segunda-feira, 22 de fevereiro de 2016 18:16:47 PST Turunen Tuukka wrote: >> Hi, >> >> For both WEC7 and WEC13 Qt

Re: [Development] Scalable UIs in QtQuick (take 2)

On 18/02/16 12:05, "Development on behalf of Hausmann Simon" wrote: >Hi, > > >(1) Do I understand your question correctly in the sense that you're wondering >if 5cm would still

Re: [Development] 5.7 new features and 5.6 changelog

On 16/02/16 14:38, "Development on behalf of Peter Kümmel" <development-bounces+lars.knoll=theqtcompany@qt-project.org on behalf of syntheti...@gmx.net> wrote: > > >Am 16.02.2016 um 08:29 schrieb Knoll Lars: >> Hi everybody, >> >> It would be gr

[Development] 5.7 new features and 5.6 changelog

Hi everybody, It would be great if those of you who haven’t done so yet fill in the 5.7 new features page on the wiki (https://wiki.qt.io/New_Features_in_Qt_5.7), so that we can get a good overview over the bigger new features in 5.7. In addition, I’d like to ask every maintainer to have a

Re: [Development] API/ABI changes report

On 12/02/16 08:50, "Development on behalf of Sune Vuorela" wrote: >On 2016-02-11, Thiago Macieira wrote: >>> There are several remaining issues in the report. So I have some questions: >>> >>> - Is

Re: [Development] Qt::CaseInsensitive comparison is not the same as toLower() comparison

Hi Thiago, On 10/02/16 19:27, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira" wrote: >Hi all > >(especially Konstantin!) > >When reviewing a change, I noticed that QString::startsWith with >CaseInsensitive compares

[Development] 5.7 feature freeze

Hi everybody, we’re slightly past the originally planned date for the feature freeze, for various reasons (new stuff being open sourced, license change and being late with 5.6). But I believe most things should be in place now to do the feature freeze for 5.7 next Monday. There are currently

Re: [Development] New KDE Free Qt Foundation agreement and changes to Qt

On 27/01/16 13:34, "Konstantin Tokarev" <annu...@yandex.ru> wrote: > > >13.01.2016, 14:15, "Knoll Lars" <lars.kn...@theqtcompany.com>: >> Hi everybody, >> >> The Qt Company has over the last days signed a new and updated agreement &g

Re: [Development] Proposal to include QtGamepad as an add-on module

And another +1 from me. Cheers, Lars On 26/01/16 08:42, "Development on behalf of Mike Krus" wrote: >+1, will be useful for the tvOS remote! > > >Mike > >On 25/01/2016 15:37, Agocs Laszlo wrote: >> Hello, >> >> The Qt

Re: [Development] Proposal to include qtscxml as Qt add-on module

+1 for making it a TP in 5.7 and another +1 for Erik becoming the maintainer. Cheers, Lars On 25/01/16 19:49, "Development on behalf of Turunen Tuukka" wrote: > >+1 > >State machine framework has been part of

Re: [Development] Stepping down as Windows Embedded Compact port maintainer

On 25/01/16 14:54, "Development on behalf of Giuseppe D'Angelo" wrote: >Il 23/10/2015 22:19, Hausmann Simon ha scritto: >> +1x2 > >Howdy, > >was this nomination somehow lost in the process? Looks like it. Sorry for

Re: [Development] QStringLiteral vs QLatin1String , foreach vs for range

On 20/01/16 11:58, "Development on behalf of Marc Mutz" wrote: >On Wednesday 20 January 2016 08:19:04 Thiago Macieira wrote: >> On Wednesday 20 January 2016 08:12:58 André Somers wrote: >> > Where is this qAsConst coming from?

Re: [Development] Question about QCoreApplicationData::*_libpaths

On 15/01/16 23:20, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira" wrote: >On Friday 15 January 2016 18:42:43 Marc Mutz wrote: >> And you will see it over and over again until enough people are fixing >> premature

Re: [Development] Question about QCoreApplicationData::*_libpaths

On 19/01/16 11:52, "Development on behalf of Marc Mutz" <development-boun...@qt-project.org on behalf of marc.m...@kdab.com> wrote: >On Tuesday 19 January 2016 09:39:02 Knoll Lars wrote: >> On 15/01/16 23:20, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira&quo

Re: [Development] Question about QCoreApplicationData::*_libpaths

On 19/01/16 13:50, "Development on behalf of Marc Mutz" <development-boun...@qt-project.org on behalf of marc.m...@kdab.com> wrote: >On Tuesday 19 January 2016 11:47:29 Knoll Lars wrote: >> >My answer would be to use std containers exclusively, and write a >>

Re: [Development] QStringLiteral vs QLatin1String , foreach vs for range

On 20/01/16 08:12, "Development on behalf of André Somers" wrote: > > >Op 20/01/2016 om 06:47 schreef Thiago Macieira: >> On Wednesday 20 January 2016 05:20:36 Kevin Kofler wrote: >>> Thiago Macieira wrote: foreach

Re: [Development] Qt Virtual Keyboard (New KDE Free Qt Foundation Agreement and Changes)

+1 and +1 from me as well :) Cheers, Lars On 19/01/16 13:16, "Development on behalf of Marc Mutz" wrote: >On Tuesday 19 January 2016 08:22:54 Viironen Kalle wrote: >> Hi, >> >> As Lars mentioned in his email about KDE

Re: [Development] New KDE Free Qt Foundation agreement and changes to Qt

On 14/01/16 08:49, "Development on behalf of Andreas Aardal Hanssen" <development-boun...@qt-project.org on behalf of andr...@hanssen.name> wrote: >2016-01-13 12:15 GMT+01:00 Knoll Lars <lars.kn...@theqtcompany.com>: > >Hi everybody, >The Qt Company h

Re: [Development] Charts and DataVis (New KDE Free Qt Foundation Agreement and Changes)

On 14/01/16 14:54, "Development on behalf of Marc Mutz" wrote: >On Thursday 14 January 2016 12:58:21 Keränen Pasi wrote: >> Hi, >> >> As Lars mentioned in his email on KDE Free Qt foundation agreement and >> changes, we’re

[Development] New KDE Free Qt Foundation agreement and changes to Qt

Hi everybody, The Qt Company has over the last days signed a new and updated agreement with the KDE Free Foundation. With this new agreement come some adjustments to the open source licensing of Qt. Basically LGPLv3 will in the future be our main license for frameworks, GPLv3 for the tooling.

Re: [Development] buildsystem now needs to keep behaviour compatibility

On 10/12/15 15:37, "Development on behalf of Koehne Kai" wrote: > > >> -Original Message- >> From: Development [mailto:development-boun...@qt-project.org] On >> Behalf Of Oswald Buddenhagen >> Sent:

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

On 09/12/15 11:00, "Development on behalf of Oswald Buddenhagen" wrote: >On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 08:43:53PM +0100, Marc Mutz wrote: >> On Tuesday 08 December 2015 15:52:06 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: >> > your

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

On 09/12/15 11:19, "Giuseppe D'Angelo" <dange...@gmail.com> wrote: >On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Knoll Lars <lars.kn...@theqtcompany.com> >wrote: >> And I’d say it’s about time to stop that particular sub-thread. It’s neither >> productive nor lea

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

On 07/12/15 15:44, "Development on behalf of Marc Mutz" wrote: >On Monday 07 December 2015 13:48:58 Ziller Eike wrote: >> I do not think that more usage of ‘auto’ will make any code (or >> refactorings of it) ‘safer’. IMO

Re: [Development] RFC: new moc feature

On 05/12/15 21:37, "Development on behalf of Marc Mutz" wrote: >On Saturday 05 December 2015 20:20:27 Sean Harmer wrote: >> I was >> just wondering if we could get it down to the theoretical ideal of a >> single integer

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

On 07/12/15 14:05, "Development on behalf of Marc Mutz" wrote: >On Monday 07 December 2015 12:23:41 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 10:29:09PM +0100, Marc Mutz wrote: >> > On Friday 04 December 2015

Re: [Development] Please do not remove QtWebkit from 5.6 official binaries

On 03/12/15 15:09, "Development on behalf of Edward Sutton" on behalf of edward.sut...@subsite.com> wrote: Will Qt 5.6 have alternative methods to export HTML to PDF that support

Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

I think we all agree with the goal we have with Qt to make C++ development accessible and easy. This is something we will continue to do. But the question asked here was about how we use a certain c++11 feature in our *implementation*. This is clearly different from what we do with our APIs

Re: [Development] Suggestion for change on how blockers are marked in Jira

On 30/11/15 13:13, "Development on behalf of Eskil A. Blomfeldt" wrote: > > >On 27. nov. 2015 14:53, Paul Olav Tvete wrote: >> On Friday, November 27, 2015 02:23:01 PM Eskil A. Blomfeldt wrote: >>> I

Re: [Development] QLocale changed?

Its a behavioural change, after we got quite a few bug reports about this behaviour (being inconsistent with what people expect). See change 3695285fde904935fc2e88010dac171144e8677a and the bug reports mentioned in there. Cheers, Lars On 26/11/15 09:39, "Development on behalf of David

Re: [Development] Nominating Pasi Keränen for Approver status

And another big +1 from me :) Cheers, Lars On 23/11/15 12:55, "Development on behalf of Hausmann Simon" wrote: >+1 > > >Simon > > >From: Development

Re: [Development] RFD: plugins vs QStringLiterals

On 12/11/15 12:28, "Development on behalf of Paul Olav Tvete" wrote: >On Friday 6. November 2015 10.10.52 Thiago Macieira wrote: >> But before I go and modify QFactoryLoader... what is that class for? Can >> anyone

Re: [Development] Qt LTS & C++11 plans

On 11/11/15 00:41, "Development on behalf of Marc Mutz" wrote: >On Tuesday 10 November 2015 19:43:35 Olivier Goffart wrote: >> Likewise, Marc is trying to use std::declval and type traits >> in exception specification

Re: [Development] Qt LTS & C++11 plans

On 04/11/15 15:31, "Albert Astals Cid" <albert.ast...@canonical.com> wrote: >On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Knoll Lars ><lars.kn...@theqtcompany.com> wrote: >> Qt 5.6: >> >> * We make 5.6 a long term supported release > >Any plan on how

Re: [Development] Qt LTS & C++11 plans

On 10/11/15 19:43, "Olivier Goffart" <oliv...@woboq.com> wrote: >On Tuesday 23. June 2015 10:17:40 Knoll Lars wrote: >[...] >> Qt 5.7: >> * New compiler baseline with gcc 4.7 and VC++ 2012 >> * Enable and use the C++11 features supported by these c

Re: [Development] Override toString() method for c++ QObject types in QML

On 08/11/15 22:57, "Development on behalf of Stephen Kelly" wrote: >Konstantin Ritt wrote: > >> Maybe JSON.stringify(obj) is what you need? >> > >I think the intention is to override what that does using a specified >method.

Re: [Development] RFD: plugins vs QStringLiterals

On 06/11/15 17:38, "Development on behalf of Giuseppe D'Angelo" wrote: >On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> They just need to deep-copy the >> strings they return in the plugin

Re: [Development] QNX and Dinkumware support for constexpr and nullptr

Hi Thiago, Removing QNX support is not an option; we agreed at the contributor summit that QNX 6.6 is part of the baseline, just as much as VS 2012 is. So if that toolchain has some issues, we’ll need to work around them just as for some other platforms. In fact, we have always been and will

Re: [Development] Proposing Markus Goetz

On 27/10/15 22:34, "Development on behalf of Robin Burchell" wrote: >He already is >(https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/admin/groups/12,members) - I guess >it just never transferred to his other account. Yes, indeed.

Re: [Development] Stepping down as Windows Embedded Compact port maintainer

On 23/10/15 13:14, "development-bounces+lars.knoll=theqtcompany@qt-project.org on behalf of Milian Wolff" wrote: >On Friday, October 23, 2015 12:14:02 PM CEST Andrew Knight wrote: >> On

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

On 22/10/15 10:56, "Paul Olav Tvete" <paul.tv...@theqtcompany.com> wrote: >On Tuesday 20. October 2015 23.37.27 Thiago Macieira wrote: >> Em qua 21 out 2015, às 06:29:30, Knoll Lars escreveu: >> > As I remember it, the change from QSubString to QStringRef w

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

On 21/10/15 08:37, "development-bounces+lars.knoll=theqtcompany@qt-project.org on behalf of Thiago Macieira" <development-bounces+lars.knoll=theqtcompany@qt-project.org on behalf of thiago.macie...@intel.com> wrote: >Em qua 21 out 2015, às 06:29:30, Knoll Lar

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

On 20/10/15 18:11, "development-bounces+lars.knoll=theqtcompany@qt-project.org on behalf of Thiago Macieira" wrote: >On Tuesday 20 October 2015 08:49:17 André Somers wrote: >> Op

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

On 20/10/15 09:59, "Bubke Marco" wrote: >On October 20, 2015 08:43:26 Thiago Macieira >wrote: > >> On Tuesday 20 October 2015 09:44:23 Marc Mutz wrote: >>> So if deep copies loose their ineffciency myth, what reason remains to >>>not >>>

Re: [Development] Updating the minimal supported version of libxcb

On 15/10/15 17:59, "Thiago Macieira" wrote: >On Thursday 15 October 2015 18:26:23 Александр Волков wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Currently Qt supports libxcb 1.5, which is very old (it was released on >> December 3, 2009) >> It complicates adding new bundled xcb libraries,

[Development] Outfit based collation (was: RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings)

Hi Marco, On 16/10/15 11:46, "Bubke Marco" wrote: > >>> That is the >>> power of iterators and with the new features of C++ they get really >>>useful. >>> But anyway, I don't say that we have to change everything. The last >>>time >>> we did that we broke our event

Re: [Development] Outfit based collation (was: RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings)

Wow... I have no idea how my mail client autocorrected utf8 to Outfit. :) Cheers, Lars On 16/10/15 12:53, "Knoll Lars" <lars.kn...@theqtcompany.com> wrote: >Hi Marco, > >On 16/10/15 11:46, "Bubke Marco" <marco.bu...@theqtcompany.com> wrote: &g

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

On 14/10/15 23:51, "Bubke Marco" wrote: >On October 14, 2015 23:10:26 Thiago Macieira >wrote: > >> On Wednesday 14 October 2015 20:52:12 Bubke Marco wrote: >>> On October 14, 2015 22:13:11 Thiago Macieira >>> >>

Re: [Development] QTime microsecond support

On 15/10/15 08:29, "Marc Mutz" wrote: >On Thursday 15 October 2015 06:03:40 Thiago Macieira wrote: >> We'll have to have a long discussion on what to name the class, >>though... >> QTimeExtended? QExtendedTime? QTimeV2? QMicroTime? QTimeSpan? >

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

On 13/10/15 22:46, "Matthew Woehlke" wrote: >On 2015-10-13 15:59, Jake Petroules wrote: >> On Oct 13, 2015, at 1:46 PM, Marc Mutz wrote: >>> I would therefore like to propose to abandon QString for new API (and >>>over >>> time phase it out of existing API), and only

Re: [Development] RFC: Proposal for a semi-radical change in Qt APIs taking strings

I’m not a huge fan of having different overloads with QString, QStringRef and QLatin1String and in some cases (QChar *, int) for many methods neither. But while your proposal solves some problems it introduces others. A QStringView class would only work for methods that read the data contained in

Re: [Development] New Qt Modules

I think the new repos are generally ok. The only one I could see that could make sense in an existing repo is the dbus qml integration, but then again, this one can’t live in qtbase where the rest of the dbus code lives. So it’s either a separate repo, or we add it to the qtdeclarative repo.

Re: [Development] New Qt Modules

On 13/10/15 12:22, "Oswald Buddenhagen" <oswald.buddenha...@theqtcompany.com> wrote: >On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 09:52:54AM +, Knoll Lars wrote: >> The only one I could see that could make sense in an existing repo is >>the >> dbus qml integration, but then

Re: [Development] 5.5.1 ChangeLog contains important information, please make sure it's in the announcement

On 23/09/15 06:12, "Thiago Macieira" wrote: >For 5.5.0, the announcements did not include any link to the changelog, >which >included important information to users. I fixed that post-release. > >Let's please not make the same mistake for 5.5.1. > >Also, please

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtQml.diff

Only one new method in qqmldebug. Looks good. Lars On 17/09/15 12:57, "Frederik Gladhorn" wrote: > ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtGui.diff

nfusing, when we add wrappers for more versions? What will we call the wrapper class for OpenGL 4? Or are you planning to put those into the extras as well? Cheers, Lars > >BR, >Laszlo > >-Original Message- >From: Knoll Lars >Sent: 21. september 2015 12:29 >To: d

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff

On 21/09/15 16:10, "Marc Mutz" wrote: >On Thursday 17 September 2015 12:29:27 Frederik Gladhorn wrote: >> I'll send the actual header diffs as attachments in follow-up mails, > >For next time, I think it would be a good idea to have this diff as a >Gerrit >change on 5.(x-1)

Re: [Development] ANGLE upgrade plans for 5.6/5.7

Hi Andrew, This sounds like a solid plan. For 5.6, we probably don’t have any other choice than staying with what we have now. For 5.7, the desktop this sounds ok IMO. I actually don’t think we need to (or should) support VS2012 there at all. I’d only like to get a confirmation from the WEC

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtCore.diff

APIs look good, just two doc fixes: https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/126153/ https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/126154/ Cheers, Lars ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtWidgets.diff

On 21/09/15 11:05, "Knoll Lars" <lars.kn...@theqtcompany.com> wrote: >Tons of noise with Q_NULLPTR and similar changes... > >New APIs: > >QFileDialog::supportedSchemes property, looks good > >QDesktopWidget::primaryScreenChanged signal >-> IMO this sho

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtWidgets.diff

On 21/09/15 13:47, "Knoll Lars" <lars.kn...@theqtcompany.com> wrote: > > >On 21/09/15 11:05, "Knoll Lars" <lars.kn...@theqtcompany.com> wrote: > >>Tons of noise with Q_NULLPTR and similar changes... >> >>New APIs: >> >

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtGui.diff

New QImage::pixelColor and setPixelColor methods, looking good New QImageReader::gamma/setGamme methods, looking good QMouseEvent has a new constructor, looks ok Some new methods in QOpenGLFBO, looking ok to me QColor: rgba64 support, looking ok QPaintDevice::devicePixelRatioF, looks ok Some

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtWidgets.diff

Tons of noise with Q_NULLPTR and similar changes... New APIs: QFileDialog::supportedSchemes property, looks good QDesktopWidget::primaryScreenChanged signal -> IMO this should be added as NOTIFY to the corresponding property. qHash(QSizePolicy, uint), looks good QMainWindow::GroupedDragging

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtNetwork.diff

New APIs: Added support for redirections: QNetworkReply::redirected() signal QNetworkReply::InsecureRedirectError QNetworkRequest::FollowRedirectsAttribute These look good to me. int QNetworkRequest::maximumRedirectsAllowed() const; void QNetworkRequest::setMaximumRedirectsAllowed(int

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtSql.diff

No new API. Nice change in qsqlindex.h :) Looks good. On 17/09/15 12:56, "Frederik Gladhorn" wrote: > ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtQuick.diff

New properties: QQuickFramebufferObject::mirrorVertically, looks ok QQuickPaintedItem::textureSize, not ok. It’s not versioned. New methods: * QQuickTextureFactory *textureFactoryForImage(const QImage ), docs not ok IMO. New classes: * QQuickImageResponse Isn’t this class missing some way to

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtQuick.diff

On 18/09/15 09:59, "Albert Astals Cid" <albert.ast...@canonical.com> wrote: >On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Knoll Lars <lars.kn...@theqtcompany.com> >wrote: >> New properties: >> >> QQuickFramebufferObject::mirrorVertically, looks ok >> QQuick

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtQuick.diff

On 18/09/15 10:55, "Albert Astals Cid" <albert.ast...@canonical.com> wrote: >On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Knoll Lars ><lars.kn...@theqtcompany.com> wrote: >> On 18/09/15 09:59, "Albert Astals Cid" <albert.ast...@canonical.com> >>

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtQuick.diff

On 18/09/15 10:49, "Gunnar Sletta" <gun...@sletta.org> wrote: > >> On 18 Sep 2015, at 09:36, Knoll Lars <lars.kn...@theqtcompany.com> >>wrote: >> >> New properties: >> >> QQuickFramebufferObject::mirrorVertically, looks ok >>

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtBluetooth.diff

Only new API is void setPreferredSecurityFlags(QBluetooth::SecurityFlags flags); QBluetooth::SecurityFlags preferredSecurityFlags() const; API Looks good, but I’m wondering why the default on bluez is not Secure as on the other platforms? Cheers, Lars

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtSerialPort.diff

Looks good. On 17/09/15 12:55, "Frederik Gladhorn" wrote: > ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtPositioning.diff

Nothing new here. On 17/09/15 12:55, "Frederik Gladhorn" wrote: > ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtQuickTest.diff

Nothing new, looks good. On 17/09/15 12:54, "Frederik Gladhorn" wrote: > ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Qt 5.6.0 header diff: QtOpenGL.diff

No changes, looks good. On 17/09/15 12:57, "Frederik Gladhorn" wrote: > ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

  1   2   3   4   5   >