Re: [Development] Nominating Daniel Smith as approver
+1. Disclaimer: I'm guilty for convincing him to join the gerrit admin team :) Paul On 02/03/2020, 23:17, "Development on behalf of Andy Shaw" wrote: +1 from me too Andy -Original Message- From: Development on behalf of Volker Hilsheimer Date: Monday, 2 March 2020 at 17:42 To: "development@qt-project.org" Subject: [Development] Nominating Daniel Smith as approver Hi all, I’d like to nominate Daniel Smith as approver for the Qt Project. Daniel has been working with Qt since he joined the Qt Company as a full-time employee in the Oslo QA team two years ago. He’s been focusing on the QA infrastructure, which includes the test rigs for the rendering tests, and enabling auto-testing on Android. More recently, Daniel has implemented a bunch of very useful tooling, such as the un-blacklisting tool, and the cherry-pick bot that will implement our new branch policy. He’s a gerrit admin, and I trust that he will follow the Qt guidelines, and use the approver rights responsibly. Here is a list of his changes: https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/owner:Daniel.Smith%2540qt.io Disclaimer: I’m Daniel's manager in the Qt Company. Best regards, Volker ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] QtWayland future
Il giorno gio 27 feb 2020 alle ore 15:49 Tor Arne Vestbø < tor.arne.ves...@qt.io> ha scritto: > Hi Pier! > > First of all I’d like to strongly echo your thanks to Johan for his > amazing work on QtWayland! > > The module is important to us as well, and we’d like to see it continued. > As of now we do not have a dedicated person to take over Johan's work, but > this is something we’re looking to address. > > In the interim, Eskil will be our point of contact, as discussed here: > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/merge_requests/20#note_419952, > and our graphics team, who has many people with Wayland experience, will > follow up anything that comes up. > > What are the things you see on the horizon for Qt 6? > There are different topics, there are already a couple of epics: https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-64598 https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-68847 plus off the top of my head: - implement missing protocols like pointer constraints/relative motion (started working on it: qtwayland code should be in good shape, needs to clarify how does qtgui changes work on other platforms) - possibly a better API for WaylandOutput modes from QML - allow to set frame margins for client-side decorations (this is related to QWindow and xdg-shell, probably other platforms too) There are also some notes from QtCS '19: https://wiki.qt.io/Qt_Contributors_Summit_2019_-_Qt_Wayland_Client_and_extensions -- https://liri.io An OS and apps built with modern design and features ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Nominating Daniel Smith as approver
+1 from me too Andy -Original Message- From: Development on behalf of Volker Hilsheimer Date: Monday, 2 March 2020 at 17:42 To: "development@qt-project.org" Subject: [Development] Nominating Daniel Smith as approver Hi all, I’d like to nominate Daniel Smith as approver for the Qt Project. Daniel has been working with Qt since he joined the Qt Company as a full-time employee in the Oslo QA team two years ago. He’s been focusing on the QA infrastructure, which includes the test rigs for the rendering tests, and enabling auto-testing on Android. More recently, Daniel has implemented a bunch of very useful tooling, such as the un-blacklisting tool, and the cherry-pick bot that will implement our new branch policy. He’s a gerrit admin, and I trust that he will follow the Qt guidelines, and use the approver rights responsibly. Here is a list of his changes: https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/owner:Daniel.Smith%2540qt.io Disclaimer: I’m Daniel's manager in the Qt Company. Best regards, Volker ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Nominating Daniel Smith as approver
+1. Best regards, Timur. From: Development on behalf of Tor Arne Vestbø Sent: Monday, March 2, 2020 5:54 PM To: Volker Hilsheimer Cc: development@qt-project.org Subject: Re: [Development] Nominating Daniel Smith as approver +1 !! > On 2 Mar 2020, at 17:40, Volker Hilsheimer wrote: > > Hi all, > > > I’d like to nominate Daniel Smith as approver for the Qt Project. > > Daniel has been working with Qt since he joined the Qt Company as a full-time > employee in the Oslo QA team two years ago. > > He’s been focusing on the QA infrastructure, which includes the test rigs for > the rendering tests, and enabling auto-testing on Android. More recently, > Daniel has implemented a bunch of very useful tooling, such as the > un-blacklisting tool, and the cherry-pick bot that will implement our new > branch policy. > > He’s a gerrit admin, and I trust that he will follow the Qt guidelines, and > use the approver rights responsibly. > > Here is a list of his changes: > https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/owner:Daniel.Smith%2540qt.io > > > Disclaimer: I’m Daniel's manager in the Qt Company. > > > Best regards, > Volker > > ___ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Nominating Daniel Smith as approver
+1 !! > On 2 Mar 2020, at 17:40, Volker Hilsheimer wrote: > > Hi all, > > > I’d like to nominate Daniel Smith as approver for the Qt Project. > > Daniel has been working with Qt since he joined the Qt Company as a full-time > employee in the Oslo QA team two years ago. > > He’s been focusing on the QA infrastructure, which includes the test rigs for > the rendering tests, and enabling auto-testing on Android. More recently, > Daniel has implemented a bunch of very useful tooling, such as the > un-blacklisting tool, and the cherry-pick bot that will implement our new > branch policy. > > He’s a gerrit admin, and I trust that he will follow the Qt guidelines, and > use the approver rights responsibly. > > Here is a list of his changes: > https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/owner:Daniel.Smith%2540qt.io > > > Disclaimer: I’m Daniel's manager in the Qt Company. > > > Best regards, > Volker > > ___ > Development mailing list > Development@qt-project.org > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Nominating Daniel Smith as approver
> On 2 Mar 2020, at 17:40, Volker Hilsheimer wrote: > > Hi all, > > > I’d like to nominate Daniel Smith as approver for the Qt Project. +1 he’s been doing a great job on several fronts ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
[Development] Nominating Daniel Smith as approver
Hi all, I’d like to nominate Daniel Smith as approver for the Qt Project. Daniel has been working with Qt since he joined the Qt Company as a full-time employee in the Oslo QA team two years ago. He’s been focusing on the QA infrastructure, which includes the test rigs for the rendering tests, and enabling auto-testing on Android. More recently, Daniel has implemented a bunch of very useful tooling, such as the un-blacklisting tool, and the cherry-pick bot that will implement our new branch policy. He’s a gerrit admin, and I trust that he will follow the Qt guidelines, and use the approver rights responsibly. Here is a list of his changes: https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/owner:Daniel.Smith%2540qt.io Disclaimer: I’m Daniel's manager in the Qt Company. Best regards, Volker ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] A modest proposal: disable lower-case keywords (emit, foreach, forever, signals, slots) by default
On 28 Feb 2020, at 21:33, Lars Knoll mailto:lars.kn...@qt.io>> wrote: So to shortcut this discussion a bit: I am completely opposed to a massive SIC changes/efforts for our signals (like giving them ugly names like emitClicked(), or signal objects). If people feel strongly, I am open to trying to find a way to keep some sort of ‘emit’ prefix (whether that’s Q_EMIT or a [[qt::emit]] attribute), but I do agree with Marc that we should in the long term try to get away from having emit/signals/slots defined as macros (at least by default). +1 but I hope we end up getting started on this “long term” project in some form. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] A modest proposal: disable lower-case keywords (emit, foreach, forever, signals, slots) by default
On 02/03/2020 16:42, Matthew Woehlke wrote: On 28/02/2020 15.33, Lars Knoll wrote: This is all nice and fun to bike shed about, but I don’t think those proposed solutions match the scope of the original problem (which was relatively small). I don’t think a massive source compatibility breakage is what we want, just because there is one std header using emit as a method name. I read this as: let's not do anything. With which I agree. And most of Qt’s signals are named in a way that makes it rather obvious it’s a signal we’re looking at (e.g. fooChanged() or clicked()), so there’s no need for an ‘emit’ in front to be clear. I don't see consensus here. On the contrary, the majority seems to feel that emit/Q_EMIT is useful. +1 André ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] A modest proposal: disable lower-case keywords (emit, foreach, forever, signals, slots) by default
On 28/02/2020 15.33, Lars Knoll wrote: > This is all nice and fun to bike shed about, but I don’t think those > proposed solutions match the scope of the original problem (which > was relatively small). I don’t think a massive source compatibility > breakage is what we want, just because there is one std header using > emit as a method name. I read this as: let's not do anything. With which I agree. > And most of Qt’s signals are named in a way that makes it rather > obvious it’s a signal we’re looking at (e.g. fooChanged() or > clicked()), so there’s no need for an ‘emit’ in front to be clear. I don't see consensus here. On the contrary, the majority seems to feel that emit/Q_EMIT is useful. -- Matthew ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
