On Monday 20 April 2015 23:23:13 Kevin Krammer wrote:
On Friday, 2014-10-10, 00:19:51, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
So my *personal* plan for Jessie+1 is this: not loose a single second on
QtWebEngine.
Of course I won't stop anyone in trying to ship it. But if no one steps
On Friday, 2014-10-10, 00:19:51, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer wrote:
So my *personal* plan for Jessie+1 is this: not loose a single second on
QtWebEngine.
Of course I won't stop anyone in trying to ship it. But if no one steps up
to maintain it I will not hesitate in simply ignoring
Hello,
thanks for pushing this transition. What do you think, if I
have a library, which is now built against qt4, should I just
switch to qt5 or create lib-qt5-dev for the transition period?
The second question is the problem with armel and armhf
qt5-builds. I think it will cause some problems
Hey,
kdepim in now on the track to release a Qt5 version in August. kdepim has a
dependency on QtWebEngine.
Of course I won't stop anyone in trying to ship it. But if no one steps up
to maintain it I will not hesitate in simply ignoring it as much as
possible, even at the point of not
I'll stand up to ship it :)
Regards,
sandro
I can help with whatever needs fixing and what not.
Cheers
Rohan Garg
--
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
On Monday 20 April 2015 17:16:40 you wrote:
Hey,
kdepim in now on the track to release a Qt5 version in August. kdepim has a
dependency on QtWebEngine.
Saw this on IRC and I'm about to write to kde-core-devel, previously syncing
with Fedora maintainers
Of course I won't stop anyone in
