Re: Interesting issue for kde-baseapps, Jenkins kdesrc-build, proposed solution

2013-03-11 Thread Christoph Cullmann
Other alternatives include splitting kate up in the various library/runtime- support/application components but that's a lot of extra work for what is really just a kde-projects problem. Does anyone have objections to the sysadmins realigning the 3 git modules in question? (And if so,

Re: Review Request 109404: Give more precedence to qmake executable names that specify the version

2013-03-11 Thread Stephen Kelly
On March 11, 2013, 5:19 a.m., Andrea Scarpino wrote: I was quite clear: qmake must point by default to Qt 4 if Qt 4 present. While qtchooser sounds like a great solution to handle this, it only adds more confusion from a packager view: we cannot have N differents configurations for qt

Re: Review Request 109404: Give more precedence to qmake executable names that specify the version

2013-03-11 Thread Andrea Scarpino
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/109404/#review28931 --- I was quite clear: qmake must point by default to Qt 4 if Qt 4

Re: Review Request 109404: Give more precedence to qmake executable names that specify the version

2013-03-11 Thread Andrea Scarpino
On March 11, 2013, 6:19 a.m., Andrea Scarpino wrote: I was quite clear: qmake must point by default to Qt 4 if Qt 4 present. While qtchooser sounds like a great solution to handle this, it only adds more confusion from a packager view: we cannot have N differents configurations for qt

Re: Review Request 109404: Give more precedence to qmake executable names that specify the version

2013-03-11 Thread Stephen Kelly
On March 11, 2013, 5:19 a.m., Andrea Scarpino wrote: I was quite clear: qmake must point by default to Qt 4 if Qt 4 present. While qtchooser sounds like a great solution to handle this, it only adds more confusion from a packager view: we cannot have N differents configurations for qt

Re: Review Request 109404: Give more precedence to qmake executable names that specify the version

2013-03-11 Thread Andrea Scarpino
On March 11, 2013, 6:19 a.m., Andrea Scarpino wrote: I was quite clear: qmake must point by default to Qt 4 if Qt 4 present. While qtchooser sounds like a great solution to handle this, it only adds more confusion from a packager view: we cannot have N differents configurations for qt

Review Request 109421: Support custom providers in the GHNS upload dialog

2013-03-11 Thread Sven Brauch
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/109421/ --- Review request for kdelibs. Description --- The download dialog

Re: Review Request 109404: Give more precedence to qmake executable names that specify the version

2013-03-11 Thread Thiago Macieira
On March 11, 2013, 5:19 a.m., Andrea Scarpino wrote: I was quite clear: qmake must point by default to Qt 4 if Qt 4 present. While qtchooser sounds like a great solution to handle this, it only adds more confusion from a packager view: we cannot have N differents configurations for qt

Re: Review Request 107716: Fix generating kconfig skeletons with UrlList fields that have a default value

2013-03-11 Thread Albert Astals Cid
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/107716/#review29012 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Albert Astals Cid On March 11, 2013,

Re: Review Request 107716: Fix generating kconfig skeletons with UrlList fields that have a default value

2013-03-11 Thread Commit Hook
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/107716/#review29014 --- This review has been submitted with commit

Re: Review Request 107716: Fix generating kconfig skeletons with UrlList fields that have a default value

2013-03-11 Thread Commit Hook
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/107716/ --- (Updated March 11, 2013, 6:42 p.m.) Status -- This change has been

Re: kwalletmanager ui refactor

2013-03-11 Thread Valentin Rusu
On Sunday 03 February 2013 17:50:05 Andrei Sebastian Cîmpean wrote: On Sunday 03 February 2013 16:40:04 Anders Lund wrote: Søndag den 3. februar 2013 14:50:33 skrev Valentin Rusu: Great to get rid of that extra window! What I think is why even the graphical representation of it? How many

Re: kwalletmanager ui refactor

2013-03-11 Thread Valentin Rusu
On Tuesday 12 February 2013 14:10:23 Aurélien Gâteau wrote: Le Wednesday 06 February 2013 23:14:59 Valentin Rusu a écrit : Thanks, I understand it better now. Assuming it was also possible to get a list of the authorized applications, I created a new revision of the mockups which show