[Development] Issues with latest Qt MaintenanceTool and Kaspersky
Hello Qt Team, I just ran the updater using the MaintenanceTool. After the update, the MaintenanceTool got listed as malware by Kaspersky Anti-Virus and removed from the system. Refer to the screenshot below: [image: image.png] [image: image.png] I have been using both Qt and KAV together for the last several years without any issues. Are *deferredrenamekERbOS.vbs* and *deferredrenameQIoNFA.vbs* included in the MaintenanceTool package? Why suddenly did the anti-virus start listing it as malware? Has anyone else observed this? Thanks & Regards, Nibedit ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Qt6 repo
Any progress on QTQAINFRA-4200 ? On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 6:56 PM Edward Welbourne wrote: > Nibedit Dey (14 January 2021 22:18) wrote: > >>> We will wait for the Qt maintainers to take a call on this topic and > >>> let us know the decision. > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 3:17 PM Edward Welbourne > wrote: > >> Well, this mailing list *is* where and how the Qt maintainers make such > >> decisions, so let's have a concrete proposal (not new, just spelled out > >> here for the sake of concreteness): > >> > >> * Rename the old qt.git to qt4.git > >> * Change anything that previously referenced qt.git to point to qt4.git > >> * Rename qt5.git to qt.git > >> * Retain a qt5.git symlink to qt.git on our public servers, so that > >>those with checkouts using any of them as a remote (notably > everyone's > >>gerrit remote set up by init-repository) don't suffer disruption > >> * Change all instructions for how to work on Qt development to talk > >>about the qt.git repo > >> > >> The 5.* branches in qt.git will then obviously be the Qt 5 branches; the > >> 6.* branches will equally obviously be the Qt 6 branches. That dev is a > >> future Qt 6 version shall be a reasonable guess, although eventually dev > >> shall be the branch for Qt 7 development after we've released the last > >> Qt 6 minor; but that won't make much difference to a contributor, in any > >> case. Once 7.* branches show up it'll be natural to suppose dev relates > >> to them, in the same way. > >> > >> Then we have a simple qt.git as the super-repo for Qt, in all versions > >> after Qt 4, alongside the repositories for all the sub-modules that get > >> checked out under it, at least by the release team, notwithstanding that > >> some developers may be doing other things that better suit their own > >> workflows. > >> > >> At some point in the distant future, we'll be able to delete the qt5.git > >> symlink, but we have no reason to to rush. > >> > >> If we are feeling really paranoid, we can split the first two steps up > >> into > >> > >> * Move qt.git to qt4.git, put in place a qt.git symlink pointing to it, > >> * Change all public mentions of qt.git to qt4.git > >> * Wait a month, remove symlink, wait a month > > Robert Löhning (15 January 2021 21:00) > > I guess a week on each side will be sufficient, but please reserve some > > time. > > OK, QTQAINFRA-4200 filed. > > Eddy. > ___ > 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] Qt6 repo
+1 Thank you Edward for the proposal. It sounds good to me. Best Regards, Nibedit On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 3:17 PM Edward Welbourne wrote: > Nibedit Dey (14 January 2021 22:18) wrote: > > Qt5 repo contains many branches and some have ambiguous names with > > respect to the Qt version. e.g: It is not clear whether the dev branch > > is applicable to Qt5 development or Qt6. > > That ambiguity, at least, would go away if the module were called qt.git > instead of qt5.git; and we can easily do that, once we rename the old > qt.git to qt4.git (long over-due anyway), without affecting significant > numbers of people (Qt 4 is now history). > > > We will wait for the Qt maintainers to take a call on this topic and > > let us know the decision. > > Well, this mailing list *is* where and how the Qt maintainers make such > decisions, so let's have a concrete proposal (not new, just spelled out > here for the sake of concreteness): > > * Rename the old qt.git to qt4.git > * Change anything that previously referenced qt.git to point to qt4.git > * Rename qt5.git to qt.git > * Retain a qt5.git symlink to qt.git on our public servers, so that > those with checkouts using any of them as a remote (notably everyone's > gerrit remote set up by init-repository) don't suffer disruption > * Change all instructions for how to work on Qt development to talk > about the qt.git repo > > The 5.* branches in qt.git will then obviously be the Qt 5 branches; the > 6.* branches will equally obviously be the Qt 6 branches. That dev is a > future Qt 6 version shall be a reasonable guess, although eventually dev > shall be the branch for Qt 7 development after we've released the last > Qt 6 minor; but that won't make much difference to a contributor, in any > case. Once 7.* branches show up it'll be natural to suppose dev relates > to them, in the same way. > > Then we have a simple qt.git as the super-repo for Qt, in all versions > after Qt 4, alongside the repositories for all the sub-modules that get > checked out under it, at least by the release team, notwithstanding that > some developers may be doing other things that better suit their own > workflows. > > At some point in the distant future, we'll be able to delete the qt5.git > symlink, but we have no reason to to rush. > > If we are feeling really paranoid, we can split the first two steps up > into > > * Move qt.git to qt4.git, put in place a qt.git symlink pointing to it, > * Change all public mentions of qt.git to qt4.git > * Wait a month, remove symlink, wait a month > > or insert some other time intervals in place of month, that suffice to > give a decent chance that anyone affected will trip over the change and > get their chance to catch up on what's happened, before qt.git changes > its meaning entirely. But I doubt we need to be this paranoid. > > All discussion of *what* resides in qt.git, including whether to break > out the Coin provisioning stuff to another module, is separate from this > so can be handled as a separate discussion (please change Subject). > > Eddy. > ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Qt6 repo
Thank you again everyone for the suggestions. Most people have agreed that there is a need for simplifying the repo nomenclature, build system, and scripts. This will attract contributions from more Qt developers. People who have been using Qt for years are familiar with the submodules, and the scripts. However, when a new person tries to contribute, they often get confused with the existing complexities. Adding inputs from Andy and Volker below: Andy Nichols : *"So let's have the discussion then. Qt is already ridiculously hard to build and contribute to for new-commers not already well acquainted with the arcane knowledge without additional silliness like this. Qt 6 has been released, so it's a bit ridiculous at this point to still point contributors at the qt5.git super module to contribute to Qt 6.qt = qt4qt5 = qt5 and qt6 (depends on branch).We could come up with a solution that avoids this. Why not just have a new supermodule specifically for Qt6 or for even lower effort have an alias repo called qt6. It's such a small thing in practice, but it causes unnecessary confusion for those not already in-the-know."* Volker Hilsheimer: *"Given that there’ll be a Qt 7 and Qt 8, and perhaps not only after 7 years, I’d prefer a “qt. git” which contains only the .gitmodules file (plus needed LICENSE files), and whatever “bootstrapping” script and README we want to help with our somewhat special git setup (gerrit specific hooks; our commit templates; ssh configuration since our gerrit server listens on port 29418, and requires a special cypher to be used; that we want people to pull from code.qt.io <http://code.qt.io> rather than from gerrit; etc).* *I don’t quite understand why all those Qt 5 branches will confuse people; if you look for branches, use grep or whatever. So, I’d rather rename today’s qt.git to qt4.git, and qt5.git to qt.git. Or as a second option rename qt.git to qt4.git and then start with a fresh qt.git."* Qt5 repo contains many branches and some have ambiguous names with respect to the Qt version. e.g: It is not clear whether the *dev *branch is applicable to Qt5 development or Qt6. Since Qt6 is a major change with the removal of obsolete modules, there can be confusion while submitting bug fixes. When Qt7 comes and Qt5 officially gets abandoned, then people who want to use Qt5 can still keep it maintained without creating further confusion. We will wait for the Qt maintainers to take a call on this topic and let us know the decision. Best Regards, Nibedit On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 12:51 PM Nibedit Dey wrote: > Thank you everyone for the suggestions. > I posted in the development group as there was less participation on the > topic in the interest group. > Below are my suggestions: > >- Create a clean qt6 supermodule for better maintainability. It's >still not too late. >- If the qt5 supermodule is renamed, then it will still have many qt5 >branches. This may create confusion while looking for specific branches. >- The use of a script is a good idea, but it needs to be mentioned in >the README document. Else new Qt developer or contributors may face >difficulties while building from source. > > Any thoughts? > > Best Regards, > Nibedit > > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 4:06 PM Nibedit Dey wrote: > >> Hello Everyone, >> >> Is there any plan to move the qt6 source code to a different repo (qt6)? >> Currently, the branch lies inside the qt5 repo. >> Is there going to be a Qt6 super module in near future? >> >> Thanks & Regards, >> Nibedit >> > ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Qt6 repo
Thank you everyone for the suggestions. I posted in the development group as there was less participation on the topic in the interest group. Below are my suggestions: - Create a clean qt6 supermodule for better maintainability. It's still not too late. - If the qt5 supermodule is renamed, then it will still have many qt5 branches. This may create confusion while looking for specific branches. - The use of a script is a good idea, but it needs to be mentioned in the README document. Else new Qt developer or contributors may face difficulties while building from source. Any thoughts? Best Regards, Nibedit On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 4:06 PM Nibedit Dey wrote: > Hello Everyone, > > Is there any plan to move the qt6 source code to a different repo (qt6)? > Currently, the branch lies inside the qt5 repo. > Is there going to be a Qt6 super module in near future? > > Thanks & Regards, > Nibedit > ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
[Development] Qt6 repo
Hello Everyone, Is there any plan to move the qt6 source code to a different repo (qt6)? Currently, the branch lies inside the qt5 repo. Is there going to be a Qt6 super module in near future? Thanks & Regards, Nibedit ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
