On Oct 4, 2011, at 9:13 AM, ext craig.sc...@csiro.au wrote:
On 04/10/2011, at 6:05 PM, morten.sor...@nokia.com wrote:
On Sep 29, 2011, at 6:02 AM, ext Rohan McGovern wrote:
It would be good if we could somehow get some more data/feedback on who
might be interested to deploy a Qt 5.0
On Sep 29, 2011, at 6:02 AM, ext Rohan McGovern wrote:
It would be good if we could somehow get some more data/feedback on who
might be interested to deploy a Qt 5.0 app on OSX 10.6. Right now I
have argued against it mostly for selfish reasons and I honestly have
no idea who cares about it
On 04/10/2011, at 6:05 PM, morten.sor...@nokia.com wrote:
On Sep 29, 2011, at 6:02 AM, ext Rohan McGovern wrote:
It would be good if we could somehow get some more data/feedback on who
might be interested to deploy a Qt 5.0 app on OSX 10.6. Right now I
have argued against it mostly for
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 9:05 AM, morten.sor...@nokia.com wrote:
I would like to require 10.7 for developing (with) Qt 5. My impression is
that most developers are running that version anyway and I would rather not
have to maintain 10.6 support during the Qt 5.0 development.
Can you do
04.10.2011, 11:16, Robin Burchell robin...@viroteck.net:
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 9:05 AM, morten.sor...@nokia.com wrote:
I would like to require 10.7 for developing (with) Qt 5. My impression is
that most developers are running that version anyway and I would rather not
have to
04.10.2011, 11:05, morten.sor...@nokia.com:
On Sep 29, 2011, at 6:02 AM, ext Rohan McGovern wrote:
It would be good if we could somehow get some more data/feedback on who
might be interested to deploy a Qt 5.0 app on OSX 10.6. Right now I
have argued against it mostly for selfish
Rohan wrote:
I have some comments on the target platforms.
On all platforms, Open GL (ES) 2.0 is required.
linux-x86-32-gcc-x11 Ubuntu Linux 10.04 ×86 32 bit, X11
linux-x86-64-gcc-x11 Ubuntu Linux 10.04 ×86 64 bit, X11
linux-x86-32-gcc-wayland Linux Ubuntu
On 28/09/2011, at 10:20 PM, henry.haveri...@nokia.com
henry.haveri...@nokia.com wrote:
Rohan wrote:
I have some comments on the target platforms.
On all platforms, Open GL (ES) 2.0 is required.
linux-x86-32-gcc-x11 Ubuntu Linux 10.04 ×86 32 bit, X11
linux-x86-64-gcc-x11
On Thu, 29 Sep 2011, craig.sc...@csiro.au wrote:
I would strongly recommend you include Ubuntu LTS releases in your CI. These
are specifically meant to be long-lived and so, by definition, won't go away
quickly. Yes, plenty of people move to the latest and greatest versions, but I
think
On Tuesday, 27 de September de 2011 10:03:17 craig.sc...@csiro.au wrote:
This discussion about what to make a reference platform vs documented
platform seems to be specific to Linux (okay, maybe embedded too, but
discussion seems to be mostly about linux at this stage). I put it to the
list
On 27/09/2011, at 6:34 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
On Tuesday, 27 de September de 2011 10:03:17 craig.sc...@csiro.au wrote:
This discussion about what to make a reference platform vs documented
platform seems to be specific to Linux (okay, maybe embedded too, but
discussion seems to be mostly
26.09.2011, 14:58, henry.haveri...@nokia.com:
Hi all,
We have started to document the scope of Qt 5.0 in terms of the platform
configurations and modules: http://developer.qt.nokia.com/wiki/Qt_5.0
The data is based on talking to the people working on different modules.
Obviously this is
henry.haveri...@nokia.com wrote:
Hi all,
We have started to document the scope of Qt 5.0 in terms of the platform
configurations and modules: http://developer.qt.nokia.com/wiki/Qt_5.0
The data is based on talking to the people working on different modules.
Obviously this is only a
26.09.2011, 14:58, henry.haveri...@nokia.com:
Hi all,
We have started to document the scope of Qt 5.0 in terms of the platform
configurations and modules: http://developer.qt.nokia.com/wiki/Qt_5.0
The data is based on talking to the people working on different modules.
Obviously this is
On Monday, 26 de September de 2011 13:08:28 Stephen Kelly wrote:
Qt Test Needed for conformance testing but not required to be
included in the release. No compatibility promise
What is this about? There is no binary or source compatibility promise for
the QtTest module? Or do I
On Monday, 26 de September de 2011 15:01:14 Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
Why are you planning to support 32-bit Intel Compiler but not 64 bit? It
would be more reasonable to do vice versa.
Intel Compiler support is provided by Intel.
We started with 32-bit because that's the most important one
On 9/26/11 1:12 PM, ext Konstantin Tokarev annu...@yandex.ru wrote:
26.09.2011, 14:58, henry.haveri...@nokia.com:
Hi all,
We have started to document the scope of Qt 5.0 in terms of the platform
configurations and modules: http://developer.qt.nokia.com/wiki/Qt_5.0
The data is based on
] Documenting the scope of Qt 5.0
Hi all,
We have started to document the scope of Qt 5.0 in terms of the platform
configurations and modules: http://developer.qt.nokia.com/wiki/Qt_5.0
The data is based on talking to the people working on different modules.
Obviously this is only a draft
On Monday, 26 de September de 2011 12:10:55 lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote:
What is new low level C++ API for QtWebKit? Will we be able to use
WebKit 2
in pure C++ applications?
Nobody knows yet how it'll exactly look like. What we know is that we will
need the WebKit2 process separation for at
Henry:
This list aims to be specific enough to describe what actually would
run in the continuous integration system, hence it mentions Ubuntu.
In the release documentation or product documentation, we should be
more generic, extrapolate, and include the other non-reference
platforms
On Monday, 26 de September de 2011 14:15:45 henry.haveri...@nokia.com wrote:
Yes. The release documentation should list where it was tested -- but it
can also document where it is reasonable to expect Qt to work (in other
words it is OK to extrapolate).
Agreed.
For example, if someone
21 matches
Mail list logo
