Re: [Development] Repository Request: qt/licensing

2018-05-18 Thread Thiago Macieira 
On Friday, 18 May 2018 12:53:00 PDT Kai Koehne wrote:
> > From: Development  on
> > behalf of Thiago Macieira 
> > 
> > 
> > Is the source code for licheck going to be added to the repository?
> 
> No, I'd only add the binaries.
> 
> > If not, then the binary cannot be added to the a Qt Project repository.
> 
> With "Qt Project repository" I guess you mean any git submodule of qt5.git,
> and further submodules? Or is this just the hosting on
> codereview.qt-project.org that you're concerned about?

I understand the lines are blurred between Qt Project and Qt Company with the 
qt.io domain. Let's unblur them:

The Git repositories and this mailing list are Qt Project. Everything there is 
Open Source. Please don't add a binary tool that isn't Open Source, even if it 
is freely redistributable.

> Just for clarification: The official source packages contain the licheck
> executables already. My aim is that a git checkout and the source packages
> we provide contain the very same content.

I understand, but I'm asking you not to.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center



___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Repository Request: qt/licensing

2018-05-18 Thread Kai Koehne 
> As such, the repository should be readable by everyone, but write access 
> should be limited to The Qt Company.
>
> I don’t understand how would that solve the issue.  Wouldn’t this repo need 
> to be cloned and then (somehow) merged with qtbase?

Yes, it would be a git submodule of qtbase.


> If public

> read/download access if not a concern, wouldn’t it make more sense to just 
> add licheck and the licenses to qtbase repo?


That would indeed be the easiest. I proposed a separate submodule because
a) binary checkins will blow up repository content over time, which we should 
avoid for central modules like qtbase.

b) people that want to just use the opensource version or a tech preview 
version can just ignore the submodule.


Alternatively, the submodule can also be a qt5.git submodule, instead of a 
qtbase one. The logic in qtbase could still locate a repository relative to 
qtbase.


Kai


From: Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.) 
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2018 4:45:20 PM
To: Kai Koehne; development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] Repository Request: qt/licensing

On 5/18/18, 10:36 AM, "Development on behalf of Kai Koehne" 
 wrote:

Hi,

I'd like to request the creation of a repository "qt/licensing" on 
codereview.qt-project.org. This will become an optional git submodule of qtbase 
(checkout: qtbase/licensing).

The repository will contain the Licenses and binary files (licheck*) that 
are so far only in our commercial source packages. The goal is to allow proper 
commercial builds from git, see also 
https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-5.

As such, the repository should be readable by everyone, but write access 
should be limited to The Qt Company.

I don’t understand how would that solve the issue.  Wouldn’t this repo need to 
be cloned and then (somehow) merged with qtbase?  If public read/download 
access if not a concern, wouldn’t it make more sense to just add licheck and 
the licenses to qtbase repo?

Brett

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Repository Request: qt/licensing

2018-05-18 Thread Kai Koehne 
> From: Development  on 
> behalf of Thiago Macieira 

>
> Is the source code for licheck going to be added to the repository?

No, I'd only add the binaries.

> If not, then the binary cannot be added to the a Qt Project repository.

With "Qt Project repository" I guess you mean any git submodule of qt5.git, and 
further submodules? Or is this just the hosting on codereview.qt-project.org 
that you're concerned about?

Just for clarification: The official source packages contain the licheck 
executables already. My aim is that a git checkout and the source packages we 
provide contain the very same content.

Kai
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Repository Request: qt/licensing

2018-05-18 Thread Thiago Macieira 
On Friday, 18 May 2018 07:36:37 PDT Kai Koehne wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'd like to request the creation of a repository "qt/licensing" on
> codereview.qt-project.org. This will become an optional git submodule of
> qtbase (checkout: qtbase/licensing).
> 
> The repository will contain the Licenses and binary files (licheck*) that
> are so far only in our commercial source packages. The goal is to allow
> proper commercial builds from git, see also
> https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-5.
> 
> As such, the repository should be readable by everyone, but write access
> should be limited to The Qt Company.

Is the source code for licheck going to be added to the repository?

If not, then the binary cannot be added to the a Qt Project repository.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center



___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Repository Request: qt/licensing

2018-05-18 Thread Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.) 
On 5/18/18, 10:36 AM, "Development on behalf of Kai Koehne" 
 wrote:

Hi,

I'd like to request the creation of a repository "qt/licensing" on 
codereview.qt-project.org. This will become an optional git submodule of qtbase 
(checkout: qtbase/licensing). 

The repository will contain the Licenses and binary files (licheck*) that 
are so far only in our commercial source packages. The goal is to allow proper 
commercial builds from git, see also 
https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-5.

As such, the repository should be readable by everyone, but write access 
should be limited to The Qt Company.

I don’t understand how would that solve the issue.  Wouldn’t this repo need to 
be cloned and then (somehow) merged with qtbase?  If public read/download 
access if not a concern, wouldn’t it make more sense to just add licheck and 
the licenses to qtbase repo?

Brett

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

[Development] Repository Request: qt/licensing

2018-05-18 Thread Kai Koehne 
Hi,

I'd like to request the creation of a repository "qt/licensing" on 
codereview.qt-project.org. This will become an optional git submodule of qtbase 
(checkout: qtbase/licensing). 

The repository will contain the Licenses and binary files (licheck*) that are 
so far only in our commercial source packages. The goal is to allow proper 
commercial builds from git, see also 
https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-5.

As such, the repository should be readable by everyone, but write access should 
be limited to The Qt Company.

Kai

--
Kai Koehne, Senior Manager R | The Qt Company

The Qt Company GmbH, Rudower Chaussee 13, D-12489 Berlin
Geschäftsführer: Mika Pälsi, Juha Varelius, Mika Harjuaho. Sitz der
Gesellschaft: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, 
HRB 144331 B

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Nominating Jüri Valdmann for Approver status

2018-05-18 Thread Alex Blasche 
Congratulations to Jüri. The rights have been adjusted.

--
Alex


From: Development  
on behalf of Michal Klocek 
Sent: Friday, 27 April 2018 10:58:20 AM
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: [Development] Nominating Jüri Valdmann for Approver status

Hi

I would like to nominate Jüri Valdmann for Approver.

He joined The Qt Company more than one year ago and he's been doing most
of his excellent work for QtWebEngine.

You can see his contributions here:

https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/owner:%22J%C3%BCri%20Valdmann%22,n,z

Br

Michal
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

[Development] Qt 5.11.0 RC2 out

2018-05-18 Thread Jani Heikkinen 
Hi,

We have released Qt 5.11.0 RC2 today. Delta to RC(1) release can be found as an 
attachment.
We are still targeting to release Qt 5.11.0 Tue 22nd May as planned

br,
Jani
qt5.git
d75411d6e560fcec1ab36395e88b1baf26c4cb69 Fix linking of qdoc against an 
external libclang (part 1)
qt3d:
15e863517ea37ca7ba6bcb75b078272eddbc5d37 Remove erronous entry about 
QFragmentOutput in the changelog
qtbase:
6eef81ee1c82f934e14d47047d8b6103b8755321 QFileSystemEngine: don't try to use 
statx(2) if SYS_statx isn't defined
qtdoc:
0d097a6995be7498b67b1586f8b2ebdc2cef26a3 Fix whats new docs for Qt 5.11
8a0244d3f46c1eb9904d9da7e741bb2e05ca3f3d Remove the qtcluster demo
qtserialbus:
c66a364cf34b4945208f07362deabe0020e5b596 Fix compilation with MSVC 2017
qttools:
a42d3f2ac4b910ecc910ff144191cb729a745c9a Fix logic for choosing static or 
dynamic libclang linkage
36e7b1925e2ff2df167280eb3592b99697a1234d Allow to link qdoc dynamically to 
libclang
qtwebengine:
28e0320235d33f00c6c141a549dc0553ee0043a5 Update Chromium
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development