Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Turunen Tuukka]

On 16.11.2012 10.39, "Qi Liang"  wrote:

>For real auto test, it's very different to run between on real hardware
>and on other emulator solutions.
>
>But I agree with Thiago that emulator solutions is better than real
>hardware for CI, CI can't be too slow on some specific platforms.

Exactly. We have another system in place at Digia that runs automated
tests in much larger amount of platforms than are in the CI. These include
a number of different embedded operating systems running on some different
HW platforms.

>
>We really need to have daily build and auto test running on some selected
>hardware platforms, but not in CI. At least it could give some feedback
>to the developers who focus on those specific platforms. We did that
>before for symbian/meego.

Correct. The current release test system is in no way connected to the CI
(except that we leverage same test asset and built the automation on top
of it), and currently only running with 4.8. We need to connect this to
the CI and overall test system at some point after we have 5.0.0
completed. 

Yours,

Tuukka

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

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Qi Liang]

For real auto test, it's very different to run between on real hardware and on 
other emulator solutions.

But I agree with Thiago that emulator solutions is better than real hardware 
for CI, CI can't be too slow on some specific platforms.

We really need to have daily build and auto test running on some selected 
hardware platforms, but not in CI. At least it could give some feedback to the 
developers who focus on those specific platforms. We did that before for 
symbian/meego.

Regards,
Liang


From: development-bounces+liang.qi=digia@qt-project.org 
[development-bounces+liang.qi=digia@qt-project.org] on behalf of Thiago A. 
Corrêa [thiago.cor...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 5:50 PM
To: Rutledge Shawn
Cc: development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1
platforms

Hi

On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Rutledge Shawn
 wrote:
>
> Well it's so uncommon to do builds right on the ARM platform, and maybe our 
> CI is not currently set up to cross-compile on one platform and run tests on 
> another?  But it's probably possible to do with a few Raspberry Pi's or some 
> sort of ARM-based blade server, as long as it has enough storage and RAM and 
> ethernet, just like the other platforms.  Then install one of the more 
> complete ARM distros like Debian or Arch that actually has a compiler, and 
> icecream.  But it might still slow down the overall CI process unless there 
> are enough of them to run in parallel.
>

Compiling on the target is very unusual, and slow. Crosscompiling +
running tests on qemu looks like a better option IMHO.

Kind Regards,
 Thiago A. Correa
___
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] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Joseph Crowell]

Could openSuse Build Service results be used at all?

On 15/11/2012 12:38 AM, Stephen Chu wrote:
> On 11/14/12 8:37 AM, Sorvig Morten wrote:
>> 10.6 is separate issue. It is getting less relevant, but still has a 
>> significant market share (31%)[0]. I would say it's a bit to early to drop 
>> it.
> Also 10.6 supports 32-bit machines. If 10.6 is still officially
> supported, so should 32-bit on 10.6.
> ___
> 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] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Stephen Chu]

On 11/14/12 8:37 AM, Sorvig Morten wrote:
> 10.6 is separate issue. It is getting less relevant, but still has a 
> significant market share (31%)[0]. I would say it's a bit to early to drop it.

Also 10.6 supports 32-bit machines. If 10.6 is still officially 
supported, so should 32-bit on 10.6.
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[shane.kearns]

> There haven't been too much discussion about different Linux
> configurations, But as you can see from list of currently CI tested
> configurations there are quite many of them. Personally I'm thinking
> that we should remove Ubuntu
> 10.04 or at least reduce the number of tested configurations from 2 to
> 1 and use that HW capacity to extended testing of different Windows
> configurations and possibly static builds of Qt. That said my
> suggestion for Qt 5 Linux CI configurations is:
>
> linux-g++-32_Ubuntu_10.04_x86 (possibly to be removed)
> linux-arm-gnueabi-g++_Ubuntu_11.10_x86
> linux-g++_shadow-build_Ubuntu_11.10_x86
> linux-g++_developer-build_qtnamespace_qtlibinfix_Ubuntu_11.10_x64
> linux-g++_no-widgets_Ubuntu_12.04_x64
> linux-g++developer-build_static_Ubuntu_12.04_x64 (new)
>

10.04 LTS is more important than 11.10, as it gives test coverage of a 
different window manager and the 0.9 openSSL libraries.
I'd say to drop 11.10 if anything, since it is very similar to 12.04 LTS.

If keeping only one configuration on a platform, keep the developer build since 
it has more test coverage than the production build.

This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, 
proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it in 
error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other 
use of the e-mail by you is prohibited.

Where allowed by local law, electronic communications with Accenture and its 
affiliates, including e-mail and instant messaging (including content), may be 
scanned by our systems for the purposes of information security and assessment 
of internal compliance with Accenture policy.

__

www.accenture.com

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

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Sorvig Morten]

On Nov 13, 2012, at 2:17 PM, Koehne Kai  wrote:
> 
> Tukka and Qi Liang wants to see OS X 10.8 (maybe replacing 10.6) in the list. 
> The feasibility of this is probably something again for the CI system 
> maintainers + mac platform maintainer (Morten) to answer...

We should make the most recent version of OS X Tier 1 as it is released, if 
nothing else for the messaging: "We think this platform is important".  Can we 
say "Latest Mac OS X"?

10.6 is separate issue. It is getting less relevant, but still has a 
significant market share (31%)[0]. I would say it's a bit to early to drop it.

Morten

[0] 
http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0&qpcustomb=*2
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Anttila Janne]

Hi,

I have been following discussion on this thread for a while now and here 
are some comments from CI point of view. First I would like to list 
existing CI configurations since there clearly are some misunderstandings:

Qt 4.8
linux-g++-32_Ubuntu_10.04_x86
linux-g++_developer-build_qtnamespace_qtlibinfix_Ubuntu_11.10_x64 
linux-g++_shadow-build_Ubuntu_12.04_x64 qws_linux-x86-g++
macx-g++_OSX_10.6
macx-g++_developer-build_OSX_10.7
win32-msvc2010_Windows_7
win32-msvc2010_developer-build_Windows_7

These we plan to keep as is, possibly adding one OS X 10.8 and Windows 8 
configuration.

Qt 5.x
linux-g++-32_Ubuntu_10.04_x86
linux-g++-32_developer-build_Ubuntu_10.04_x86 
linux-arm-gnueabi-g++_Ubuntu_11.10_x86 
linux-g++_shadow-build_Ubuntu_11.10_x86
linux-g++_developer-build_qtnamespace_qtlibinfix_Ubuntu_11.10_x64 
linux-g++_no-widgets_Ubuntu_12.04_x64
macx-g++_developer-build_OSX_10.6
macx-clang_developer-build_qtnamespace_OSX_10.7 
win32-msvc2010_Windows_7 
win32-msvc2010_developer-build_qtnamespace_Windows_7 
win32-msvc2010_developer-build_angle_Windows_7

One important thing to note about CI system is that it is not only OS version
or compiler, but there is also set of different Qt configure options being 
tested
and all of those require about equivalent HW capacity. So when you today stage
something in any of the Qt5 repos, 11 machines start building and testing 
your change. When you multiply that with amount of Qt5 repositories and 
possibly soon introduced branching of repositories. You will quite quickly 
end-up to very high need for HW capacity.

Then a few comments discussions on this thread:

> However, if & when we do decide to remove XP from the CI system it should be 
> replaced with vista (as the oldest supported windows version).
> We shouldn't test only W7 and W8.

Windows XP is not currently tested by CI and I don't believe adding it to CI
would be rational in this phase - there are more important configurations to
test on HW limits we have. If adding Windows XP to makes sense somewhere
it is Qt 4.8 CI.

There is also no Windows Vista in CI and adding that to CI makes even less 
sense for me. Based on our customer surveys installation-base for Vista is 
very small (compared to XP and 7),and decreasing all the time.

> I am wondering if windows-7-64-msvc2010-angle should become a reference 
> platform and windows-7-32-msvc2010-angle a tier 1 instead, given that 
> Windows is 64bit now and running 32 bit applications is not really native.
>
> It would be nice to have it tested though, since compiling on 64bit 
> reveals additional warnings about casting between different 
> ints/pointers, etc, that might one day be caught by a compiler warnings 
> check (which I am still hoping for).

> Tuukka also wants to see Windows 8 (maybe replacing XP). 

I agree CI system should definitely have some 64-bit and  Windows 8 
configurations,but I also would like to keep some 32-bit Windows configurations 
there. And like Kai reminded in one of the previous mails we should get also 
MinGW to CI system. With these in mind my suggestion for Qt5 Windows CI 
configurations:

win32-msvc2010_Windows_7
win32-msvc2010_developer-build_angle_Windows_7
win32-mingw47_developer-build_qtlibinfix_Windows_7(new)
win64-msvc2012_developer-build_qtnamespace_Windows_8 (new)

>> Tuukka and Qi Liang wants to see OS X 10.8 (maybe replacing 10.6) in the 
>> list. The feasibility of this is probably something again for the CI system 
>> maintainers + mac platform maintainer (Morten) to answer...
>
> IMO Mac OS X 10.8 must be Tier 1. 
> Something like half a year after Qt 5.0.0, Mac OS 10.9 will be released and 
> 10.6 becomes more and more irrelevant.

I agree 10.6 is not very relevant for Qt5. And keeping in mind that we have
limited HW capacity, I suggest the following CI configurations for OS SX:

macx-clang_developer-build_qtnamespace_OSX_10.7 
macx-clang_developer-build_OSX_10.8 (new with case-sensitive file system)

One additional thing I would like to study related to OS X CI configurations is 
sandboxing. 

There haven't been too much discussion about different Linux configurations, 
But as you can see from list of currently CI tested configurations there are
quite many of them. Personally I'm thinking that we should remove Ubuntu 
10.04 or at least reduce the number of tested configurations from 2 to 1 
and use that HW capacity to extended testing of different Windows 
configurations and possibly static builds of Qt. That said my suggestion 
for Qt 5 Linux CI configurations is:

linux-g++-32_Ubuntu_10.04_x86 (possibly to be removed)
linux-arm-gnueabi-g++_Ubuntu_11.10_x86 
linux-g++_shadow-build_Ubuntu_11.10_x86
linux-g++_developer-build_qtnamespace_qtlibinfix_Ubuntu_11.10_x64 
linux-g++_no-widgets_Ubuntu_12.04_x64
linux-g++developer-build_static_Ubuntu_12.04_x64 (new)

> However, since right now

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Laszlo Papp]

>
> Compiling on the target is very unusual, and slow. Crosscompiling +
> running tests on qemu looks like a better option IMHO.
>

The ubuntu-arm, arch-arm community and the like would say the opposite
(i.e. think of a powerful board like beagle). While scratchbox was also a
"cross-compilation" environment, the build situation was a bit similar to
how you build on the target, so you had an emulated environment (qemu, not
just for tests!). Many issues occured that would not occur without emulaton
like in MADDE et al. I personally do not mind the "slower" compilation if I
can do that in the background without baby-sitting if it requires less
active work than more difficult cross-compilation setups.

Hence, I agree with Shawn about that it would be very nice to have because
unfortunately I got many issues in such environments.

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

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[BRM]

> From: "shane.kea...@accenture.com" 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 11:12 AM
> Subject: RE: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 
> platforms
>>  Win8 support would be nice to add, but please do not drop WinXP.
>>  MS may be dropping official, public support for WinXP in 2014; but it will 
>> still be around for a very long time.
> 
> Are you referring to XP for embedded? (which survives until 2016)
> I'd strongly advise anyone not to use a operating system for which there are 
> no security updates on a general purpose machine.
> While you may need to continue supporting products based on XP embedded, 
> would 
> that include putting new releases of Qt on them?

No, I'm talking about XP, at least XP Pro. Many companies are still using it 
and will continue to use it.
And whether or not I like it, I'm stuck supporting it - whether MS wants to or 
not.

And yes, I do plan on putting new release of Qt on it - as new as I can get.
As soon as Qt5 is out and it makes sense, I'll be looking at porting everything 
to Qt5; but I'll still have to support XP systems since I already have a number 
in the field and can't simply tell them they need to upgrade the system to a 
newer version of Windows. (My main Windows support environment is an XP Pro 
Virtual Machine.)
 
> However, if & when we do decide to remove XP from the CI system it should be 
> replaced with vista (as the oldest supported windows version).
> We shouldn't test only W7 and W8.

XP will probably be around longer than Vista will be.
Not to say that Vista won't have a small market share, but it will probably be 
(and remain to be) negligible compared to XP and Win7.
 
> My view would be that XP should not be a tier 1 platform for new releases 
> when 
> MS discontinues extended support.
> It should still be tested for patch releases of already released Qt versions.

Agreed at the very least; but Qt5 should officially support XP if at all 
possible.
XP won't have Extended Support discontinued until 2014 for starters 
(http://support.microsoft.com/lifecycle/?ln=en-gb&c2=1173).
 
Ben
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Thiago A . Corrêa]

Hi

On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Rutledge Shawn
 wrote:
>
> Well it's so uncommon to do builds right on the ARM platform, and maybe our 
> CI is not currently set up to cross-compile on one platform and run tests on 
> another?  But it's probably possible to do with a few Raspberry Pi's or some 
> sort of ARM-based blade server, as long as it has enough storage and RAM and 
> ethernet, just like the other platforms.  Then install one of the more 
> complete ARM distros like Debian or Arch that actually has a compiler, and 
> icecream.  But it might still slow down the overall CI process unless there 
> are enough of them to run in parallel.
>

Compiling on the target is very unusual, and slow. Crosscompiling +
running tests on qemu looks like a better option IMHO.

Kind Regards,
 Thiago A. Correa
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Rutledge Shawn]

On 7 Nov 2012, at 1:26 PM, Laszlo Papp wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Kate Alhola  wrote:
> There are no longer ANY mobile platform among Tier-1 platforms at all. 
> "linux-arm7-gcc-wayland Linux, ARM7, Wayland. To be specified in more detail" 
> can be MeeGo/SailFish but that's very little for us, mobile developers. Why 
> there is not even Android even it is leading mobile platform and Qt works 
> fine on it.  To have even some degree of reasonable cross platform story, 
> least Android and iOS should be there.
> 
> Qt for mobile is not dead after Nokia but I rather say that it is only cross 
> platform mobile toolkit. Html5 is only .
> 
> I have always been surprised why there has no been more work done on the CI 
> front towards the very common ARM platform. I had to catch common ARM issues 
> on Harmattan and elsewhere (not only mobile phone material) that pretty much 
> came up for all the cases. Such things would have been really nice to be 
> caught by CI.

Well it's so uncommon to do builds right on the ARM platform, and maybe our CI 
is not currently set up to cross-compile on one platform and run tests on 
another?  But it's probably possible to do with a few Raspberry Pi's or some 
sort of ARM-based blade server, as long as it has enough storage and RAM and 
ethernet, just like the other platforms.  Then install one of the more complete 
ARM distros like Debian or Arch that actually has a compiler, and icecream.  
But it might still slow down the overall CI process unless there are enough of 
them to run in parallel.

In general I think we could have some more machines which work more like the 
doc bot and the sanity bot, checking patches and providing feedback without 
blocking integration.  ARM and PowerPC and minority OSes.
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[shane.kearns]

> Win8 support would be nice to add, but please do not drop WinXP.
> MS may be dropping official, public support for WinXP in 2014; but it will 
> still be around for a very long time.

> Ben

Are you referring to XP for embedded? (which survives until 2016)
I'd strongly advise anyone not to use a operating system for which there are no 
security updates on a general purpose machine.
While you may need to continue supporting products based on XP embedded, would 
that include putting new releases of Qt on them?

However, if & when we do decide to remove XP from the CI system it should be 
replaced with vista (as the oldest supported windows version).
We shouldn't test only W7 and W8.

My view would be that XP should not be a tier 1 platform for new releases when 
MS discontinues extended support.
It should still be tested for patch releases of already released Qt versions.

This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain privileged, 
proprietary, or otherwise private information. If you have received it in 
error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other 
use of the e-mail by you is prohibited.

Where allowed by local law, electronic communications with Accenture and its 
affiliates, including e-mail and instant messaging (including content), may be 
scanned by our systems for the purposes of information security and assessment 
of internal compliance with Accenture policy.

__

www.accenture.com

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

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Ziller Eike]

On 13 Nov 2012, at 14:17, Koehne Kai  wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Since there hasn't been strong objections against the list I updated the page 
> (starting with a more general note that Windows, Linux and Mac OS X are the 
> supported platforms, as Thiago suggested) : http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-5 . 
> That doesn't mean though that we can't extend it further ... here are some 
> (personal) remarks to some comments:
> 
> 
> Friedemann said he'd like to have msvc 2010 64 bit as reference platform, 
> maybe replacing msvc 2010 32 bit. Problems I see is that we don't test it 
> right now in the CI system, and that e.g. qtwebkit has currently problems on 
> windows 64 bit.
> 
> Tukka and Qi Liang wants to see OS X 10.8 (maybe replacing 10.6) in the list. 
> The feasibility of this is probably something again for the CI system 
> maintainers + mac platform maintainer (Morten) to answer…

IMO Mac OS X 10.8 must be Tier 1. Something like half a year after Qt 5.0.0, 
Mac OS 10.9 will be released and 10.6 becomes more and more irrelevant.

++ Eike

> Tukka also wants to see Windows 8 (maybe replacing XP). Maybe Friedemann 
> (platform maintainer) can comment as platform maintainer whether that is a 
> good idea?
> 
> Peter said RIM is working towards making Qt 5 working on the Blackberry 10 
> (ARM and x86) . I think it would be fine with adding it to the list of tier 1 
> platforms (even without CI), as long as it's part of the release process 
> (testing, packaging etc) and also properly tested. 
> 
> Regards
> 
> Kai
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org
>> [mailto:development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia....@qt-project.org] On
>> Behalf Of Koehne Kai
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 5:08 PM
>> To: development@qt-project.org
>> Subject: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1
>> platforms
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> The list of reference & Tier 1 platforms at http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-
>> 5#Platforms is somewhat out of date ... Here is a new proposal
>> 
>> Reference Platforms:
>> 
>> We have the following platform configurations as reference platforms for Qt
>> 5.0:
>> 
>> PLATFORM  CONFIGURATION 
>> COMPILER
>> linux-x86-32-gcc-x11  Ubuntu Linux 11.10 ×86 32 bit, X11as
>> provided
>> linux-x86-64-gcc-x11  Ubuntu Linux 11.10 ×86 64 bit, X11as
>> provided
>> windows-7-32-msvc2010-angle   Microsoft Windows 7 32 bit, ANGLE
>> MSVC2010-SP1 32-bit
>> osx-10.7-64   Apple Mac OS X 10.7 "Lion" Cocoa 64 bit   as 
>> provided
>> 
>> 
>> Tier 1 platforms:
>> 
>> In addition to the reference platform configurations, we support the
>> following configurations on Tier 1 level.
>> 
>> PLATFORM  CONFIGURATION 
>> COMPILER
>> windows-7-64-msvc2010-angle   Microsoft Windows 7 64 bit, ANGLE
>> MSVC2010-SP1 64-bit
>> windows-7-32-msvc2010-opengl  Microsoft Windows 7 32 bit, OpenGL
>> MSVC2010-SP1 32-bit
>> windows-7-64-msvc2010-opengl  Microsoft Windows 7 64 bit, OpenGL
>> MSVC2010-SP1 64-bit
>> windows-7-32-mingw-builds Microsoft Windows XP Windows 7 32 bit
>> gcc 4.7 (MinGW-builds)
>> windows-xp-32-msvc2008Microsoft Windows XP SP3 32 bit   MSVC
>> 2008 32-bit
>> osx-10.6-64   Apple Mac OS X 10.6 Cocoa 64 bit  as 
>> provided
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Remarks:
>> 
>> Before you shoot, check http://qt-project.org/groups/qt-contributors-
>> summit-
>> 2011/wiki/Qt5ProductDefinition#4582cf86974b397c8f3a2ed2fd502f8c to see
>> what we agreed upon back then what the requirements of a 'reference
>> platform' and 'Tier 1 platform' are, specifically  that they are in tested 
>> by the
>> CI system, and are available as alpha, beta, final packages.
>> 
>> windows-7-64-msvc2010, windows-7-64-msvc2010-angle, windows-7-32-
>> mingw-builds aren't checked in the CI system right now. Still I think they 
>> are
>> important enough to deserve an exception, and remain in Tier 1.
>> 
>> I understood that whether we can keep osx-10.6-64 bit as Tier 1 platform for
>> qtwebkit is yet unclear.
>> 
>> Finally, I don't know what to do  with the *wayland, *mips, *icc platforms in
>> the current version of the page.
>> 
>> 
>> Regards
>> 
>> Kai
>> _

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[BRM]

> From: Koehne Kai 

> Friedemann said he'd like to have msvc 2010 64 bit as reference platform, 
> maybe replacing msvc 2010 32 bit. Problems I see is that we don't test it 
> right now in the CI system, and that e.g. qtwebkit has currently problems on 
> windows 64 bit.

Agree with comments already made regarding this.

> Tukka also wants to see Windows 8 (maybe replacing XP). Maybe Friedemann 
> (platform maintainer) can comment as platform maintainer whether that is a 
> good 
> idea?

Win8 support would be nice to add, but please do not drop WinXP. MS may be 
dropping official, public support for WinXP in 2014; but it will still be 
around for a very long time.

Ben

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

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Thiago Macieira]

On terça-feira, 13 de novembro de 2012 07.02.40, Charley Bay wrote:
> > Friedemann said he'd like to have msvc 2010 64 bit as reference platform,
> > maybe replacing msvc 2010 32 bit.
>
> Really?  I would assume that 32-bit is still a significantly-large
> audience that we could *add* 64-bit, but that we likely would need to
> keep 32-bit (for a while).

Reference != Tier 1. I am with you that we can't stop supporting it. 32-bit
needs to remain Tier 1.

But I wouldn't mind seeing 64-bit as a reference platform, whenever that is
possible.

> So, question:  How many developers target 64-bit Windows exclusively
> (not 32-bit-Windows)?  (Has that day come?)
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Charley Bay]

> Friedemann said he'd like to have msvc 2010 64 bit as reference platform,
> maybe replacing msvc 2010 32 bit.

Really?  I would assume that 32-bit is still a significantly-large
audience that we could *add* 64-bit, but that we likely would need to
keep 32-bit (for a while).

Have developers really cut-over to 64-bit *deployment*?  (We only
deploy 32-bit to enable a single set of binary-installers for many
target platforms, including embedded, even though yes, some of those
target platforms happen to be 64-bit.)

If msvc 2010 32-bit is dropped as "reference/tier-1", then we would
probably need to update our deployment to have two sets of installers
(32-bit because of embedded needs, but also 64-bit because that would
be the new "reference/tier-1").

This is only an observation (not a criticism) -- we'd like to take our
embedded to 64-bit eventually, but I'm unsure of when the
"generic-user-base" will no longer have a plethora of 32-bit-Windows
user operating systems.

So, question:  How many developers target 64-bit Windows exclusively
(not 32-bit-Windows)?  (Has that day come?)

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

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Koehne Kai]

Hi,

Since there hasn't been strong objections against the list I updated the page 
(starting with a more general note that Windows, Linux and Mac OS X are the 
supported platforms, as Thiago suggested) : http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-5 . 
That doesn't mean though that we can't extend it further ... here are some 
(personal) remarks to some comments:


Friedemann said he'd like to have msvc 2010 64 bit as reference platform, maybe 
replacing msvc 2010 32 bit. Problems I see is that we don't test it right now 
in the CI system, and that e.g. qtwebkit has currently problems on windows 64 
bit.

Tukka and Qi Liang wants to see OS X 10.8 (maybe replacing 10.6) in the list. 
The feasibility of this is probably something again for the CI system 
maintainers + mac platform maintainer (Morten) to answer...

Tukka also wants to see Windows 8 (maybe replacing XP). Maybe Friedemann 
(platform maintainer) can comment as platform maintainer whether that is a good 
idea?

Peter said RIM is working towards making Qt 5 working on the Blackberry 10 (ARM 
and x86) . I think it would be fine with adding it to the list of tier 1 
platforms (even without CI), as long as it's part of the release process 
(testing, packaging etc) and also properly tested. 

Regards

Kai

> -Original Message-
> From: development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org
> [mailto:development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia@qt-project.org] On
> Behalf Of Koehne Kai
> Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 5:08 PM
> To: development@qt-project.org
> Subject: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1
> platforms
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The list of reference & Tier 1 platforms at http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-
> 5#Platforms is somewhat out of date ... Here is a new proposal
> 
> Reference Platforms:
> 
> We have the following platform configurations as reference platforms for Qt
> 5.0:
> 
> PLATFORM  CONFIGURATION 
> COMPILER
> linux-x86-32-gcc-x11  Ubuntu Linux 11.10 ×86 32 bit, X11as
> provided
> linux-x86-64-gcc-x11  Ubuntu Linux 11.10 ×86 64 bit, X11as
> provided
> windows-7-32-msvc2010-angle   Microsoft Windows 7 32 bit, ANGLE
> MSVC2010-SP1 32-bit
> osx-10.7-64   Apple Mac OS X 10.7 "Lion" Cocoa 64 bit   as 
> provided
> 
> 
> Tier 1 platforms:
> 
> In addition to the reference platform configurations, we support the
> following configurations on Tier 1 level.
> 
> PLATFORM  CONFIGURATION 
> COMPILER
> windows-7-64-msvc2010-angle   Microsoft Windows 7 64 bit, ANGLE
> MSVC2010-SP1 64-bit
> windows-7-32-msvc2010-opengl  Microsoft Windows 7 32 bit, OpenGL
> MSVC2010-SP1 32-bit
> windows-7-64-msvc2010-opengl  Microsoft Windows 7 64 bit, OpenGL
> MSVC2010-SP1 64-bit
> windows-7-32-mingw-builds Microsoft Windows XP Windows 7 32 bit
> gcc 4.7 (MinGW-builds)
> windows-xp-32-msvc2008Microsoft Windows XP SP3 32 bit   MSVC
> 2008 32-bit
> osx-10.6-64   Apple Mac OS X 10.6 Cocoa 64 bit  as 
> provided
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Remarks:
> 
> Before you shoot, check http://qt-project.org/groups/qt-contributors-
> summit-
> 2011/wiki/Qt5ProductDefinition#4582cf86974b397c8f3a2ed2fd502f8c to see
> what we agreed upon back then what the requirements of a 'reference
> platform' and 'Tier 1 platform' are, specifically  that they are in tested by 
> the
> CI system, and are available as alpha, beta, final packages.
> 
> windows-7-64-msvc2010, windows-7-64-msvc2010-angle, windows-7-32-
> mingw-builds aren't checked in the CI system right now. Still I think they are
> important enough to deserve an exception, and remain in Tier 1.
> 
> I understood that whether we can keep osx-10.6-64 bit as Tier 1 platform for
> qtwebkit is yet unclear.
> 
> Finally, I don't know what to do  with the *wayland, *mips, *icc platforms in
> the current version of the page.
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> Kai
> ___
> 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] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Laszlo Papp]

>
> we (RIM) currently have an own Jenkins setup which builds Qt for
> BlackBerry 10 (ARM and x86), and also runs auto tests (currently only
> QtCore classes unfortunately). The process of making that Jenkins node
> public including build / test logs etc. is currently stuck in a company
> security check.
> But our plan is absolutely to have test and build results public, and make
> the setup stable enough to at some point tie into the Qt CI infrastructure.
>

Thank you for this work!

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

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Peter Hartmann]

Hello,

On 11/07/2012 01:26 PM, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> (...)
> I have always been surprised why there has no been more work done on the
> CI front towards the very common ARM platform. I had to catch common ARM
> issues on Harmattan and elsewhere (not only mobile phone material) that
> pretty much came up for all the cases. Such things would have been
> really nice to be caught by CI.

we (RIM) currently have an own Jenkins setup which builds Qt for 
BlackBerry 10 (ARM and x86), and also runs auto tests (currently only 
QtCore classes unfortunately). The process of making that Jenkins node 
public including build / test logs etc. is currently stuck in a company 
security check.
But our plan is absolutely to have test and build results public, and 
make the setup stable enough to at some point tie into the Qt CI 
infrastructure.

Peter

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


-
This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential 
information, privileged material (including material protected by the 
solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public 
information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended 
recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, 
please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your 
system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission 
by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Laszlo Papp]

On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Kate Alhola  wrote:

> There are no longer ANY mobile platform among Tier-1 platforms at all.
> "linux-arm7-gcc-wayland Linux, ARM7, Wayland. To be specified in more
> detail" can be MeeGo/SailFish but that's very little for us, mobile
> developers. Why there is not even Android even it is leading mobile
> platform and Qt works fine on it.  To have even some degree of reasonable
> cross platform story, least Android and iOS should be there.
>
> Qt for mobile is not dead after Nokia but I rather say that it is only
> cross platform mobile toolkit. Html5 is only .
>

I have always been surprised why there has no been more work done on the CI
front towards the very common ARM platform. I had to catch common ARM
issues on Harmattan and elsewhere (not only mobile phone material) that
pretty much came up for all the cases. Such things would have been really
nice to be caught by CI.

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

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Turunen Tuukka]

>
>From: Kate Alhola mailto:kate.alh...@gmail.com>>
>Date: keskiviikkona 7. marraskuuta 2012 13.49
>To: Koehne Kai mailto:kai.koe...@digia.com>>
>Cc: "development@qt-project.org<mailto:development@qt-project.org>" 
>mailto:development@qt-project.org>>
>Subject: Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 
>platforms
>
>There are no longer ANY mobile platform among Tier-1 platforms at all. 
>"linux-arm7-gcc-wayland Linux, ARM7, Wayland. To be specified in more detail" 
>can be MeeGo/SailFish but that's very little for us, >mobile developers. Why 
>there is not even Android even it is leading mobile platform and Qt works fine 
>on it.  To have even some degree of reasonable cross platform story, least 
>Android and iOS should be >there.

You are absolutely right. However this discussion is not about what should be 
the Tier 1 platforms of Qt, but much simpler one: to update the list of Tier 1 
and Reference platform configurations to match the ones that there currently 
are running. The fact that Qt runs fine on a platform is a good starting point. 
But to be a Tier 1 platform also means a hefty amount of tests running on that 
etc.

Yours,

 Tuukka

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

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Kate Alhola]

There are no longer ANY mobile platform among Tier-1 platforms at all.
"linux-arm7-gcc-wayland Linux, ARM7, Wayland. To be specified in more
detail" can be MeeGo/SailFish but that's very little for us, mobile
developers. Why there is not even Android even it is leading mobile
platform and Qt works fine on it.  To have even some degree of reasonable
cross platform story, least Android and iOS should be there.

Qt for mobile is not dead after Nokia but I rather say that it is only
cross platform mobile toolkit. Html5 is only .


Kate


On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Koehne Kai  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> The list of reference & Tier 1 platforms at
> http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-5#Platforms is somewhat out of date ...
> Here is a new proposal
>
> Reference Platforms:
>
> We have the following platform configurations as reference platforms for
> Qt 5.0:
>
> PLATFORM  CONFIGURATION
> COMPILER
> linux-x86-32-gcc-x11  Ubuntu Linux 11.10 ×86 32 bit, X11as
> provided
> linux-x86-64-gcc-x11  Ubuntu Linux 11.10 ×86 64 bit, X11as
> provided
> windows-7-32-msvc2010-angle   Microsoft Windows 7 32 bit, ANGLE
> MSVC2010-SP1 32-bit
> osx-10.7-64   Apple Mac OS X 10.7 "Lion" Cocoa 64 bit   as
> provided
>
>
> Tier 1 platforms:
>
> In addition to the reference platform configurations, we support the
> following configurations on Tier 1 level.
>
> PLATFORM  CONFIGURATION
> COMPILER
> windows-7-64-msvc2010-angle   Microsoft Windows 7 64 bit, ANGLE
> MSVC2010-SP1 64-bit
> windows-7-32-msvc2010-opengl  Microsoft Windows 7 32 bit, OpenGL
>  MSVC2010-SP1 32-bit
> windows-7-64-msvc2010-opengl  Microsoft Windows 7 64 bit, OpenGL
>  MSVC2010-SP1 64-bit
> windows-7-32-mingw-builds Microsoft Windows XP Windows 7 32 bit
> gcc 4.7 (MinGW-builds)
> windows-xp-32-msvc2008Microsoft Windows XP SP3 32 bit
> MSVC 2008 32-bit
> osx-10.6-64   Apple Mac OS X 10.6 Cocoa 64 bit  as
> provided
>
>
>
>
> Remarks:
>
> Before you shoot, check
> http://qt-project.org/groups/qt-contributors-summit-2011/wiki/Qt5ProductDefinition#4582cf86974b397c8f3a2ed2fd502f8cto
>  see what we agreed upon back then what the requirements of a 'reference
> platform' and 'Tier 1 platform' are, specifically  that they are in tested
> by the CI system, and are available as alpha, beta, final packages.
>
> windows-7-64-msvc2010, windows-7-64-msvc2010-angle,
> windows-7-32-mingw-builds aren't checked in the CI system right now. Still
> I think they are important enough to deserve an exception, and remain in
> Tier 1.
>
> I understood that whether we can keep osx-10.6-64 bit as Tier 1 platform
> for qtwebkit is yet unclear.
>
> Finally, I don't know what to do  with the *wayland, *mips, *icc platforms
> in the current version of the page.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Kai
> ___
> 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] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Friedemann Kleint]

Hi,

I am wondering if windows-7-64-msvc2010-angle should become a reference 
platform and windows-7-32-msvc2010-angle a tier 1 instead, given that 
Windows is 64bit now and running 32 bit applications is not really native.

I understand there are practical problems to getting that tested in the 
CI as there are no distributing compilers for 64bit?

It would be nice to have it tested though, since compiling on 64bit 
reveals additional warnings about casting between different 
ints/pointers, etc, that might one day be caught by a compiler warnings 
check (which I am still hoping for).

Regards,
Friedemann

-- 
Friedemann Kleint
Digia, Qt

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

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Turunen Tuukka]

On 6.11.2012 23.02, "Thiago Macieira"  wrote:

>
>The above looks fine. I'd just like to be clear that the reference
>platforms 
>are, generically:
> - Windows
> - Mac OS X
> - Linux (Wayland and X11)
>
>and that you're just being specific of what that means at this particular
>point 
>in time.

True. It is important to have the exact configuration clearly communicated
for each release. 


>Like above, generically speaking, tier 1 platforms are those that
>participate 
>in the release process, providing a good, usable release and, in
>addition, 
>have a team that commits to supporting it for a certain period of time.

It is very important to have the Tier 1 platforms in the CI (and vice
versa, as earlier discussed if it is not in a CI it should not be called a
Tier 1 platform). 

>
>Your list of criteria above is a good declination and a goal that we
>should 
>strive for. However, since right now no external platform can integrate
>with 
>the CI, I don't think it's fair to require it. So we should be able to
>list 
>certain platforms as Tier 1, provided they meet the other quality
>criteria, 
>even if they aren't in the CI.

We should be able to do some CI modifications still before the final
release, if that is what we want to do.

When possible, I would like us to support OS X 10.8, Windows 8 (desktop
mode) and Ubuntu 12.04 as Tier 1 platforms of Qt 5. All these seem to
work, but we need to have these in CI as well.

What comes to supporting Windows XP and Mac OS X 10.6 with Qt 5.0 I think
it is more important to support the new ones than these, because it is a
new major version.

>
>Specifically, I'm thinking of QNX and, in turn, wondering if the team
>behind it 
>is committed to the quality effort to Tier 1 in 5.0.

We have now created the CI system setup in such way that it is possible to
connect external platforms. It would be interesting to try this with QNX
for Qt 5.x.

Yours,

Tuukka

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

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Qi Liang]

Any plan for osx-10.8-64, Mac OS X Mountain Lion, 10.8? Thanks.

Regards,
Liang

From: development-bounces+liang.qi=digia@qt-project.org 
[development-bounces+liang.qi=digia@qt-project.org] on behalf of Koehne Kai 
[kai.koe...@digia.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 5:08 PM
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1
platforms

Hi,

The list of reference & Tier 1 platforms at 
http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-5#Platforms is somewhat out of date ... Here is a 
new proposal

Reference Platforms:

We have the following platform configurations as reference platforms for Qt 5.0:

PLATFORM  CONFIGURATION COMPILER
linux-x86-32-gcc-x11  Ubuntu Linux 11.10 ×86 32 bit, X11as 
provided
linux-x86-64-gcc-x11  Ubuntu Linux 11.10 ×86 64 bit, X11as 
provided
windows-7-32-msvc2010-angle   Microsoft Windows 7 32 bit, ANGLE 
MSVC2010-SP1 32-bit
osx-10.7-64   Apple Mac OS X 10.7 "Lion" Cocoa 64 bit   as 
provided


Tier 1 platforms:

In addition to the reference platform configurations, we support the following 
configurations on Tier 1 level.

PLATFORM  CONFIGURATION COMPILER
windows-7-64-msvc2010-angle   Microsoft Windows 7 64 bit, ANGLE 
MSVC2010-SP1 64-bit
windows-7-32-msvc2010-opengl  Microsoft Windows 7 32 bit, OpenGL
MSVC2010-SP1 32-bit
windows-7-64-msvc2010-opengl  Microsoft Windows 7 64 bit, OpenGL
MSVC2010-SP1 64-bit
windows-7-32-mingw-builds Microsoft Windows XP Windows 7 32 bit gcc 4.7 
(MinGW-builds)
windows-xp-32-msvc2008Microsoft Windows XP SP3 32 bit   MSVC 
2008 32-bit
osx-10.6-64   Apple Mac OS X 10.6 Cocoa 64 bit  as 
provided




Remarks:

Before you shoot, check 
http://qt-project.org/groups/qt-contributors-summit-2011/wiki/Qt5ProductDefinition#4582cf86974b397c8f3a2ed2fd502f8c
 to see what we agreed upon back then what the requirements of a 'reference 
platform' and 'Tier 1 platform' are, specifically  that they are in tested by 
the CI system, and are available as alpha, beta, final packages.

windows-7-64-msvc2010, windows-7-64-msvc2010-angle, windows-7-32-mingw-builds 
aren't checked in the CI system right now. Still I think they are important 
enough to deserve an exception, and remain in Tier 1.

I understood that whether we can keep osx-10.6-64 bit as Tier 1 platform for 
qtwebkit is yet unclear.

Finally, I don't know what to do  with the *wayland, *mips, *icc platforms in 
the current version of the page.


Regards

Kai
___
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] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Thiago Macieira]

On terça-feira, 6 de novembro de 2012 16.08.06, Koehne Kai wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The list of reference & Tier 1 platforms at
> http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-5#Platforms is somewhat out of date ... Here
> is a new proposal
>
> Reference Platforms:
>
> We have the following platform configurations as reference platforms for Qt
> 5.0:
>
> PLATFORM  CONFIGURATION
> COMPILER linux-x86-32-gcc-x11  Ubuntu Linux 11.10 ×86 32 bit, X11
>  as provided linux-x86-64-gcc-x11  Ubuntu Linux 11.10 ×86 64
> bit, X11as provided windows-7-32-msvc2010-angle   Microsoft Windows
> 7 32 bit, ANGLE MSVC2010-SP1 32-bit osx-10.7-64
> Apple Mac OS X 10.7 "Lion" Cocoa 64 bit   as provided

The above looks fine. I'd just like to be clear that the reference platforms
are, generically:
 - Windows
 - Mac OS X
 - Linux (Wayland and X11)

and that you're just being specific of what that means at this particular point
in time.

> Tier 1 platforms:

> Remarks:
>
> Before you shoot, check
> http://qt-project.org/groups/qt-contributors-summit-2011/wiki/Qt5ProductDef
> inition#4582cf86974b397c8f3a2ed2fd502f8c to see what we agreed upon back
> then what the requirements of a 'reference platform' and 'Tier 1 platform'
> are, specifically  that they are in tested by the CI system, and are
> available as alpha, beta, final packages.

Like above, generically speaking, tier 1 platforms are those that participate
in the release process, providing a good, usable release and, in addition,
have a team that commits to supporting it for a certain period of time.

Your list of criteria above is a good declination and a goal that we should
strive for. However, since right now no external platform can integrate with
the CI, I don't think it's fair to require it. So we should be able to list
certain platforms as Tier 1, provided they meet the other quality criteria,
even if they aren't in the CI.

Specifically, I'm thinking of QNX and, in turn, wondering if the team behind it
is committed to the quality effort to Tier 1 in 5.0.

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


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Oswald Buddenhagen]

On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 10:59:03AM -0700, Charley Bay wrote:
> REQUEST:  For the Tier-1 "MSVS2010, SP1, Win7-32bit" release, IT WOULD
> BE NICE if "QMake" would still have the OPTION to generate "MSVS2008
> *.vcproj" instances.  Please.  Pretty Please.  And then, I will send
> you home-made cookies.  Every month.
> 
just run
  qmake -spec win32-msvc2008
if that doesn't just work, then the request will cost you a lot more
cookies than you think ...
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Charley Bay]

Kai spaketh:
> The list of reference & Tier 1 platforms at 
> http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-5#Platforms
> is somewhat out of date ... Here is a new proposal ,

Seems fine to me.

An aside -- serious suggestion:

We are successfully using the, "MSVS2010, SP1" compiler within the
"MSVS2008 IDE" using the steps found here:



IMHO, the MSVS2010 IDE is, "badly-broken" and quite unusable for our needs.

REQUEST:  For the Tier-1 "MSVS2010, SP1, Win7-32bit" release, IT WOULD
BE NICE if "QMake" would still have the OPTION to generate "MSVS2008
*.vcproj" instances.  Please.  Pretty Please.  And then, I will send
you home-made cookies.  Every month.

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

[Development] Proposal: New list of Qt 5 reference / Tier 1 platforms

[Koehne Kai]

Hi,
 
The list of reference & Tier 1 platforms at 
http://qt-project.org/wiki/Qt-5#Platforms is somewhat out of date ... Here is a 
new proposal

Reference Platforms:

We have the following platform configurations as reference platforms for Qt 5.0:

PLATFORM  CONFIGURATION COMPILER
linux-x86-32-gcc-x11  Ubuntu Linux 11.10 ×86 32 bit, X11as 
provided
linux-x86-64-gcc-x11  Ubuntu Linux 11.10 ×86 64 bit, X11as 
provided
windows-7-32-msvc2010-angle   Microsoft Windows 7 32 bit, ANGLE 
MSVC2010-SP1 32-bit
osx-10.7-64   Apple Mac OS X 10.7 "Lion" Cocoa 64 bit   as 
provided


Tier 1 platforms:

In addition to the reference platform configurations, we support the following 
configurations on Tier 1 level.

PLATFORM  CONFIGURATION COMPILER
windows-7-64-msvc2010-angle   Microsoft Windows 7 64 bit, ANGLE 
MSVC2010-SP1 64-bit
windows-7-32-msvc2010-opengl  Microsoft Windows 7 32 bit, OpenGL
MSVC2010-SP1 32-bit
windows-7-64-msvc2010-opengl  Microsoft Windows 7 64 bit, OpenGL
MSVC2010-SP1 64-bit
windows-7-32-mingw-builds Microsoft Windows XP Windows 7 32 bit gcc 4.7 
(MinGW-builds)
windows-xp-32-msvc2008Microsoft Windows XP SP3 32 bit   MSVC 
2008 32-bit
osx-10.6-64   Apple Mac OS X 10.6 Cocoa 64 bit  as 
provided




Remarks:

Before you shoot, check 
http://qt-project.org/groups/qt-contributors-summit-2011/wiki/Qt5ProductDefinition#4582cf86974b397c8f3a2ed2fd502f8c
 to see what we agreed upon back then what the requirements of a 'reference 
platform' and 'Tier 1 platform' are, specifically  that they are in tested by 
the CI system, and are available as alpha, beta, final packages.

windows-7-64-msvc2010, windows-7-64-msvc2010-angle, windows-7-32-mingw-builds 
aren't checked in the CI system right now. Still I think they are important 
enough to deserve an exception, and remain in Tier 1.

I understood that whether we can keep osx-10.6-64 bit as Tier 1 platform for 
qtwebkit is yet unclear.

Finally, I don't know what to do  with the *wayland, *mips, *icc platforms in 
the current version of the page.


Regards

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