Re: [Development] Qt 5.12 feature freeze is getting closer

[Jani Heikkinen]

Hi all,

Kindly reminder: Feature freeze will be in effect after 3 weeks (20.8.2018). So 
please make sure all new features for Qt 5.12 are ready and in 'dev' early 
enough. And please notify me if there will be any new or any removed submodules 
for Qt5; at the moment i don't know any changes related to that since Qt 5.11

br,
Jani

From: Jani Heikkinen
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 1:14 PM
To: development@qt-project.org
Cc: releas...@qt-project.org
Subject: Qt 5.12 feature freeze is getting closer

Hi all,

Only two months to Qt 5.12 feature freeze, see 
https://wiki.qt.io/Qt_5.12_Release. And summer vacations will take big part of 
that remaining period...

So at this point we should already know if there will be some new submodule 
modules in Qt 5.12. We are doing packaging confs etc for 5.12 now so please 
inform qt.team.relea...@qt.io (I am starting my vacation today) immediately if 
there will be some new in. And of course get the new submodule in qt5 as soon 
as possible; those really needs to be in before we start soft branching mid 
August!

br,
Jani

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

Re: [Development] Qt 6 buildsystem support requirements

[Matthew Woehlke]

On 2018-07-21 19:52, Jason Newton wrote:
> I wanted to mention that this is on my mind alot for a few years days
> as a user for a plethora of libraries.  My conclusion for the build
> system with the brightest future is bazel [...]

No. Just, *no*.

Persistent build server? Java? No, thanks.

Maybe it's gotten better, but last I knew, bazel had no notion of
"installing" software, which is just a non-starter. It's also heavily
optimized for Google's internal usage, and (partly as a result)
basically does not play at all nicely with software that's intended to
exist in an open source, package-managed ecosystem.

(I'd be interested to know if there is *any* software packaged by any
FLOSS distribution that uses bazel...)

Basically, ask your distributors before even *considering* bazel. My
suspicion is they're going to tell you that they refuse to package
anything using it.

And... seriously, *Java*?! Talk about bloat-ware... As dependencies for
*a build tool* go, that's pretty insane. Especially if you're not
planning to use it to build Java code.

By comparison, CMake+ninja depend on... a C++ compiler. (Which is also
needed for Qt itself, of course, so...) I haven't really looked, but I'd
guess qmake is also pretty light-weight in the dependency department.

> Why the qt project may be interested in this in short is:
> -Fast and scaling bazel uses a long lived server technique that hangs
> around

Yeah... that's *just* the sort of thing we should be forcing on users...
It's even *more* of an anti-feature if some other build systems needs to
build Qt. (Yes, that happens.)

On a related note, "hermetic builds" is pretty ironic. Your *build*
might be hermetic, but bazel itself is *far* from... it's very reliant
on putting all its garbage in "magic locations" in your home directory,
unlike most build tools that only need to write to your build directory.
Again, *not* friendly for anyone that needs to build Qt as an external
dependency.

> The amount of time that useful work is being performed is  greater
> than I've observed in large cmake projects, even using ninja (assuming
> ninja would work across projects that size, due to frequent make
> sensitivities)

Um... very few projects don't work with Ninja, and I've seen plenty of
very large projects that *do*.

> -Ability to build external libraries from source

Yeah... no. Building third party libraries yourself is *evil*. And a
great way to piss off package maintainers. No open source project should
*EVER* rely on, or preferably even use by default, this ability.


On 2018-07-22 06:11, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> There is also little to no documentation on packaging Bazel-using software 
> for GNU/Linux distributions. E.g., the Fedora wiki does not contain a single 
> reference to Bazel.

There's a *reason* why that's so...

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

Re: [Development] Proposing Samuel Gaist for approver status

[Konstantin Tokarev]

+1

28.07.2018, 11:56, "André" :
> Hello all,
>
> I'd like to propose Samuel as approver. He has been active in the Qt project 
> for ages.
>
> He not only provides code changes [0], he is also active reviewing others 
> changes [1].
>
> But that's not all: Samuel is *extremly* active in the Qt Forum [2], where he 
> works
> as moderator and answers plenty of questions every day.
>
> Some of his patches arised from forum questions, therefore Samuel perfectly 
> bridges
> between the end users and the Qt main developers.
>
> I think this all qualifies Samuel for the approver status.
>
> Best regards,
> André
>
> [0] 
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/owner:%22Samuel+Gaist+%253Csamuel.gaist%2540idiap.ch%253E%22,n,z
> [1] 
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/reviewer:%22Samuel+Gaist+%253Csamuel.gaist%2540idiap.ch%253E%22,n,z
> [2] https://forum.qt.io/user/sgaist
> ___
> Development mailing list
> Development@qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

-- 
Regards,
Konstantin

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

Re: [Development] Proposing Samuel Gaist for approver status

[Gabriel de Dietrich]

+1

Best regards,

Dr. Gabriel de Dietrich
Senior Software Developer
The Qt Company

On Jul 28, 2018, at 1:56 AM, André mailto:aha_1...@gmx.de>> 
wrote:

Hello all,

I'd like to propose Samuel as approver. He has been active in the Qt project 
for ages.

He not only provides code changes [0], he is also active reviewing others 
changes [1].

But that's not all: Samuel is *extremly* active in the Qt Forum [2], where he 
works
as moderator and answers plenty of questions every day.

Some of his patches arised from forum questions, therefore Samuel perfectly 
bridges
between the end users and the Qt main developers.

I think this all qualifies Samuel for the approver status.

Best regards,
André

[0] 
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/owner:%22Samuel+Gaist+%253Csamuel.gaist%2540idiap.ch%253E%22,n,z
[1] 
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/reviewer:%22Samuel+Gaist+%253Csamuel.gaist%2540idiap.ch%253E%22,n,z
[2] https://forum.qt.io/user/sgaist
___
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

Re: [Development] Proposing Samuel Gaist for approver status

[Robert Löhning]

Am 28.07.2018 um 10:56 schrieb André:

Hello all,

I'd like to propose Samuel as approver. He has been active in the Qt project 
for ages.

He not only provides code changes [0], he is also active reviewing others 
changes [1].

But that's not all: Samuel is *extremly* active in the Qt Forum [2], where he 
works
as moderator and answers plenty of questions every day.

Some of his patches arised from forum questions, therefore Samuel perfectly 
bridges
between the end users and the Qt main developers.

I think this all qualifies Samuel for the approver status.

Best regards,
André

[0] 
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/owner:%22Samuel+Gaist+%253Csamuel.gaist%2540idiap.ch%253E%22,n,z
[1] 
https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/reviewer:%22Samuel+Gaist+%253Csamuel.gaist%2540idiap.ch%253E%22,n,z
[2] https://forum.qt.io/user/sgaist
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development



How can he not be an approver?? Thanks for bringing this up, André!

+1

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

Re: [Development] Proposing Samuel Gaist for approver status

[Shawn Rutledge]

+1

> On 28 Jul 2018, at 10:56, André  wrote:
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> I'd like to propose Samuel as approver. He has been active in the Qt project 
> for ages.
> 
> He not only provides code changes [0], he is also active reviewing others 
> changes [1].
> 
> But that's not all: Samuel is *extremly* active in the Qt Forum [2], where he 
> works
> as moderator and answers plenty of questions every day.
> 
> Some of his patches arised from forum questions, therefore Samuel perfectly 
> bridges 
> between the end users and the Qt main developers.
> 
> I think this all qualifies Samuel for the approver status.
> 
> Best regards,
> André
> 
> [0] 
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/owner:%22Samuel+Gaist+%253Csamuel.gaist%2540idiap.ch%253E%22,n,z
> [1] 
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/reviewer:%22Samuel+Gaist+%253Csamuel.gaist%2540idiap.ch%253E%22,n,z
> [2] https://forum.qt.io/user/sgaist
> ___
> 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

Re: [Development] Proposing Samuel Gaist for approver status

[Edward Welbourne]

On Saturday, 28 July 2018 01:56:37 PDT André wrote:
>> I'd like to propose Samuel as approver. He has been active in the Qt project
>> for ages.
>>
>> He not only provides code changes [0], he is also active reviewing others
>> changes [1].
>>
>> But that's not all: Samuel is *extremly* active in the Qt Forum [2], where
>> he works as moderator and answers plenty of questions every day.
>>
>> Some of his patches arised from forum questions, therefore Samuel perfectly
>> bridges between the end users and the Qt main developers.
>>
>> I think this all qualifies Samuel for the approver status.

Thiago Macieira (28 July 2018 18:50)
> Another "what? he's not an approver?" case.
>
> +1 from me.

echo !

+1

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

Re: [Development] Nominating Miguel Costa for Approver

[Joerg Bornemann]

On 07/25/2018 05:12 PM, Alex Blasche wrote:


I'd like to nominate Miguel for approver rights.


+1

Disclaimer: He's sitting next to Oliver.


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