I edited and updated the controls related change log here:
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,84066
On a somewhat related note, I would suggest that for future updates we
standardize on putting the bug-id after each item entry rather than in front
as that would make the document a bit
Em qui 24 abr 2014, às 16:25:41, Bache-Wiig Jens escreveu:
On a somewhat related note, I would suggest that for future updates we
standardize on putting the bug-id after each item entry rather than in front
as that would make the document a bit more readable in my opinion. I don’t
really see
]
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 00:13
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: [Development] Changelogs for 5.3.0
Please find attached the raw logs for each of the modules that had any
[ChangeLog] in the v5.2.1..origin/release range.
I'm taking responsibility of editing the one for qtbase
On 23-Apr-14 01:09, Thiago Macieira wrote:
[...] It's also in the
imperative -- why are you telling the user to rework the implementation?
I reckon, it's because our commit policy
(http://qt-project.org/wiki/Commit_Policy) suggests to use it for commit
messages: consider the generic Git
Hi,
On 23 avr. 2014, at 01:09, Thiago Macieira thiago.macie...@intel.com wrote:
Here's some editing I've done. This serves as suggestions for other editors.
- QPA/Android:
* [QTBUG-36025] Fixed a memory leak in the clipboard
Moved to Android changes. Why was this in QtCore in the first
On 23 April 2014 08:30, Joerg Bornemann joerg.bornem...@digia.com wrote:
According to The Law I have to write the commit message in imperative
and the changelog in indicative mode.
I think it's time to become way more strict on our changelog entries,
as I feel we're abusing of Thiago's patience
Em qua 23 abr 2014, às 09:04:35, Giuseppe D'Angelo escreveu:
And no, commit message and changelog can't use the same rules. A
commit message is usually in the imperative mode, present tense (Fix
foo), and uses pluralis maiestatis + indicative in the body (We do
this, but we should do that, so
On 23-Apr-14 09:04, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
And no, commit message and changelog can't use the same rules. A
commit message is usually in the imperative mode, present tense (Fix
foo), and uses pluralis maiestatis + indicative in the body (We do
this, but we should do that, so this commit
Em qua 23 abr 2014, às 09:16:05, Joerg Bornemann escreveu:
On 23-Apr-14 09:04, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
And no, commit message and changelog can't use the same rules. A
commit message is usually in the imperative mode, present tense (Fix
foo), and uses pluralis maiestatis + indicative in
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 12:26:41AM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote:
Em qua 23 abr 2014, às 09:16:05, Joerg Bornemann escreveu:
On 23-Apr-14 09:04, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
And no, commit message and changelog can't use the same rules.
Well you can have simple rules or people making
On 23 avr. 2014, at 09:16, Thiago Macieira thiago.macie...@intel.com wrote:
Em qua 23 abr 2014, às 08:49:47, Samuel Gaist escreveu:
- QTBUG-4714:
* [QTBUG-4714] Use the grid size for wordwrapping when available in
icon
mode Task-number: QTBUG-4714 Change-Id:
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Thiago Macieira
thiago.macie...@intel.com wrote:
Please find attached the raw logs for each of the modules that had any
[ChangeLog] in the v5.2.1..origin/release range.
I'm taking responsibility of editing the one for qtbase.
For all other modules, I'd like
Please find attached the raw logs for each of the modules that had any
[ChangeLog] in the v5.2.1..origin/release range.
I'm taking responsibility of editing the one for qtbase.
For all other modules, I'd like someone to reply to this email saying they'll
be the editor. Otherwise, there will be
Here's some editing I've done. This serves as suggestions for other editors.
Everyone who has committed to qtbase please read through because I have
editing questions for you.
Em ter 22 abr 2014, às 15:13:41, Thiago Macieira escreveu:
GLES3 and desktop OpenGL are now fully supported with EGL
Em ter 22 abr 2014, às 16:09:07, Thiago Macieira escreveu:
- QTextDocumentLayout:
* [QTBUG-36743] Emit updateBlock signal in QTextDocumentLayout.
The updateBlock() signal is now emitted.
This implies we had a signal that was never emitted before. If that's not
correct, please
On quinta-feira, 18 de julho de 2013 13.18.32, Richard Moore wrote:
On 18 July 2013 01:34, Thiago Macieira thiago.macie...@intel.com wrote:
On quarta-feira, 17 de julho de 2013 21.45.11, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
Can we devise something simpler? Can we also put in our policies an
example of
On quarta-feira, 17 de julho de 2013 21.45.11, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
I 100% agree with having the changelog entry in the commit message,
but I fear the complexity there. We should try to work towards
error-proof entries -- I fear that too many people will mispell
Important Behavior Changes
Hello
At the Qt Contributor Summit, we're proposing the following:
1) commits with changes worthy of being mentioned in the release's ChangeLog
will have a note in the *commit* *message*
not in a Git note
not in JIRA
2) however automated we make the changelog creation, it will still
On terça-feira, 16 de julho de 2013 10.44.22, Rutledge Shawn wrote:
On 16 Jul 2013, at 12:22 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
3) the format for the changelog is:
a) auto-guess module from the paths changed
[ChangeLog] Here is my slightly verbose text explaining that I've done
something
On terça-feira, 16 de julho de 2013 14.40.25, Mitch Curtis wrote:
No. It's intentionally different so it does not match those. It might be
more than one line, so it needs to be a full paragraph. If you use
colons, the gerrit hook to add the Change-Id will add it in the same
paragraph. We
-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org] On
Behalf Of Matt Williams
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 11:14 AM
To: development
Subject: Re: [Development] ChangeLogs
On 29 January 2013 00:31, Alan Alpert 4163654...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:21 AM, Jason McDonald
macadd
: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 11:14 AM
To: development
Subject: Re: [Development] ChangeLogs
On 29 January 2013 00:31, Alan Alpert 4163654...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:21 AM, Jason McDonald
macadd...@gmail.com wrote:
4. Let's try to make the job of our maintainers that little bit
To: development
Subject: Re: [Development] ChangeLogs
On 29 January 2013 00:31, Alan Alpert 4163654...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:21 AM, Jason McDonald
macadd...@gmail.com wrote:
4. Let's try to make the job of our maintainers that little bit
easier by writing good commit
-Original Message-
From: development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org
[mailto:development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org] On
Behalf Of Matt Williams
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 11:14 AM
To: development
Subject: Re: [Development] ChangeLogs
On 29
On Jan 29, 2013, at 1:31 AM, Alan Alpert 4163654...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:21 AM, Jason McDonald macadd...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:05 AM, Oswald Buddenhagen
oswald.buddenha...@digia.com wrote:
as some certainly noted, the completeness of dist/changes-*
On terça-feira, 29 de janeiro de 2013 08.10.17, Knoll Lars wrote:
It had a checkbox, so you could mark a particular change as processed, and
it would store this locally. This allowed you to do the work in chunks and
you would at least always know what you've already processed. IIRC, you
could
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:05 AM, Oswald Buddenhagen
oswald.buddenha...@digia.com wrote:
as some certainly noted, the completeness of dist/changes-* severely
deteriorated over the last few minor releases, and in particular 5.0.0
is one of the poorest qt changelogs seen in a while.
also, sergio
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:21 AM, Jason McDonald macadd...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:05 AM, Oswald Buddenhagen
oswald.buddenha...@digia.com wrote:
as some certainly noted, the completeness of dist/changes-* severely
deteriorated over the last few minor releases, and in
On 1/21/13 17:14 , Thiago Macieira wrote:
On segunda-feira, 21 de janeiro de 2013 17.02.10, Tor Arne Vestbø wrote:
On 1/21/13 16:37 , Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
On 21 January 2013 15:08, Tor Arne Vestbø tor.arne.ves...@digia.com
wrote:
If you're writing the ChangeLog entry at commit time, not
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 02:18:46PM +0100, Tor Arne Vestbø wrote:
But isn't the merging done by the CI using regular Git by cherry-picking
the merging is done by gerrit itself, as you can (more or less) see when
you hit the stage button.
___
If you're writing the ChangeLog entry at commit time, not right before
the release, why can't your patch contain a change to dist/changelog
from the get-go which, can be reviewed and integrated along with the
code change?
tor arne
___
Development
On 21 January 2013 15:08, Tor Arne Vestbø tor.arne.ves...@digia.com wrote:
If you're writing the ChangeLog entry at commit time, not right before
the release, why can't your patch contain a change to dist/changelog
from the get-go which, can be reviewed and integrated along with the
code
On 1/21/13 16:37 , Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
On 21 January 2013 15:08, Tor Arne Vestbø tor.arne.ves...@digia.com wrote:
If you're writing the ChangeLog entry at commit time, not right before
the release, why can't your patch contain a change to dist/changelog
from the get-go which, can be
On segunda-feira, 21 de janeiro de 2013 17.02.10, Tor Arne Vestbø wrote:
On 1/21/13 16:37 , Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
On 21 January 2013 15:08, Tor Arne Vestbø tor.arne.ves...@digia.com
wrote:
If you're writing the ChangeLog entry at commit time, not right before
the release, why can't your
-Original Message-
From: development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org
[mailto:development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org] On
Behalf Of Thiago Macieira
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 4:49 PM
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development
On 01/17/2013 04:05 PM, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
we introduce a new footer (ChangeLog:) to commit messages. this would
shift the burden to the contributor, and it could be properly reviewed.
the generation the logs could be fully automated, and only minimal
redactional work would be
On Thursday 17. January 2013 18.25.29 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 04:05:40PM +0100, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
two more approaches have been previously proposed:
hjk suggested yet another approach: use gerrit itself to collect the
changelog entries. after some thinking, i
On sexta-feira, 18 de janeiro de 2013 09.54.37, Eskil Abrahamsen Blomfeldt
wrote:
Having it as part of the commit message seems a lot less complex to me,
and I don't think it would do any harm to an extra line of
meta-information in the bottom section with the change-id and
task-number
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 11:48:50PM +0800, Thiago Macieira wrote:
On quinta-feira, 17 de janeiro de 2013 16.05.40, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
5.0.0 is one of the poorest qt changelogs seen in a while.
Qt 5.0.0 is also one of the most major releases seen in a while -- 7.5
years to be precise.
On sexta-feira, 18 de janeiro de 2013 11.49.12, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
yes, and the purist in me agrees. but as both kai and eskil pointed out,
this isn't so much additional clutter, so whatever - i kind of don't
see the change-id lines when i browse logs anyway.
The Change-Id is not
And that leads to another downside: what if two or more commits were
necessary
to fix a bug? Then the ChangeLog line would be referring to changes that
are
not found in that commit, which could be confusing later on.
And additionally what if you solve multiple bugs in one commit?
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 07:49:41PM +0800, Thiago Macieira wrote:
On sexta-feira, 18 de janeiro de 2013 11.49.12, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
yes, and the purist in me agrees. but as both kai and eskil pointed out,
this isn't so much additional clutter, so whatever - i kind of don't
see the
On sexta-feira, 18 de janeiro de 2013 13.57.02, Sylvain Pointeau wrote:
And that leads to another downside: what if two or more commits were
necessary
to fix a bug? Then the ChangeLog line would be referring to changes that
are
not found in that commit, which could be confusing later on.
On sexta-feira, 18 de janeiro de 2013 14.03.18, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
what is much more important is that the ChangeLog entries need to be
tagged, so they can be automatically sorted into the right categories:
ChangeLog: Core: SIC: renamed brokenName() to usefulName()
i.e., what many
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 09:38:05PM +0800, Thiago Macieira wrote:
On sexta-feira, 18 de janeiro de 2013 14.03.18, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
what is much more important is that the ChangeLog entries need to be
tagged, so they can be automatically sorted into the right categories:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 04:05:40PM +0100, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
two more approaches have been previously proposed:
hjk suggested yet another approach: use gerrit itself to collect the
changelog entries. after some thinking, i came up with this process:
- add a ChangeLog: line to the commit
On quinta-feira, 17 de janeiro de 2013 16.05.40, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
hi *,
as some certainly noted, the completeness of dist/changes-* severely
deteriorated over the last few minor releases, and in particular 5.0.0
is one of the poorest qt changelogs seen in a while.
Qt 5.0.0 is also
47 matches
Mail list logo
