Re: [Development] Multiple Qt branches on Coverity Scan
Il 21/10/2016 18:16, Mutz, Marc ha scritto: > > Just one request: can anyone uploading a build of either branch please > set the description to the SHA-1 the build is based on? Apparently, > Coverity does not relate to VCS at all. I will switch to qt5.git soon. So far I've been just using the tip of 5.6 / dev (at the time of the build), and timestamping the builds in the description. Cheers, -- Giuseppe D'Angelo | giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (UK) Ltd., a KDAB Group company | Tel: UK +44-1625-809908 KDAB - Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts smime.p7s Description: Firma crittografica S/MIME ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Multiple Qt branches on Coverity Scan
Il 13/10/2016 15:11, Giuseppe D'Angelo ha scritto: > "qt-project-lts" is going to be 5.6. The new branch should be ready soon > (was told yesterday afternoon, actually), I'll send an email when this > is done. Aaand we're live. I've just successfully uploaded a build: https://scan.coverity.com/projects/qt-project-lts I copied the ACLs from the existing qt-project one, it's up to us to keep them in sync (or not in sync, for any reason). The CIDs also seem to be shared, with some already commented upon. Cheers, -- Giuseppe D'Angelo | giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (UK) Ltd., a KDAB Group company | Tel: UK +44-1625-809908 KDAB - Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts smime.p7s Description: Firma crittografica S/MIME ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Multiple Qt branches on Coverity Scan
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 02:43:13PM +0100, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote: > On 13/10/16 14:35, Marc Mutz wrote: > > Will the -lts version start out with its own CIDs or will identical issues > > have the same CIDs in both projects? If they're different, we'll have a > > mess. > > The idea was to share the database of CIDs so to keep them in sync. > That's why it's taking so long to set it up (?). I have no idea how the > matching between branches is going to work... > probably not at all. but when you fix an issue in the lower branch, it will also disappear in the higher branch, so there is no need to explicitly mention it at all. just remember to use the issue number from the correct source. ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Multiple Qt branches on Coverity Scan
On 13/10/16 14:35, Marc Mutz wrote: Will the -lts version start out with its own CIDs or will identical issues have the same CIDs in both projects? If they're different, we'll have a mess. The idea was to share the database of CIDs so to keep them in sync. That's why it's taking so long to set it up (?). I have no idea how the matching between branches is going to work... HTH, -- Giuseppe D'Angelo | giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (UK) Ltd., a KDAB Group company | Tel: UK +44-1625-809908 KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Multiple Qt branches on Coverity Scan
On Thursday 13 October 2016 15:11:18 Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote: > Heads up: > > On 03/10/16 22:46, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote: > > I'm going with "lts" and "dev" anyhow, thanks! > > To avoid losing history, we're sticking with the current "qt-project" to > represent "dev", as apparently it's not possible to rename projects. > "qt-project-lts" is going to be 5.6. The new branch should be ready soon > (was told yesterday afternoon, actually), I'll send an email when this > is done. Will the -lts version start out with its own CIDs or will identical issues have the same CIDs in both projects? If they're different, we'll have a mess. On that note: I've started using Coverity-Id: N akin to Task-number: in footers of commit messages related to Coverity fixes. Please use them, too. Maybe we can highlight them in Gerrit and link to the issue directly, even? Thanks, Marc -- Marc Mutz | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company Tel: +49-30-521325470 KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Multiple Qt branches on Coverity Scan
Heads up: On 03/10/16 22:46, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote: I'm going with "lts" and "dev" anyhow, thanks! To avoid losing history, we're sticking with the current "qt-project" to represent "dev", as apparently it's not possible to rename projects. "qt-project-lts" is going to be 5.6. The new branch should be ready soon (was told yesterday afternoon, actually), I'll send an email when this is done. Related: the "qtbase" and "qtdeclarative" standalone projects have not been updated for 2+ years, and they're fully embraced by qt-project[-lts], so they're getting removed. Cheers, -- Giuseppe D'Angelo | giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (UK) Ltd., a KDAB Group company | Tel: UK +44-1625-809908 KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Multiple Qt branches on Coverity Scan
Il 03/10/2016 23:28, Thiago Macieira ha scritto: > Maybe "lts" is better because we can then reuse the project for the next LTS, > whenever that happens. Given the number of branches that other projects have, I don't think it's going to be a problem in the future to create or destroy new branches. I'm going with "lts" and "dev" anyhow, thanks! Cheers, -- Giuseppe D'Angelo | giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (UK) Ltd., a KDAB Group company | Tel: UK +44-1625-809908 KDAB - Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts smime.p7s Description: Firma crittografica S/MIME ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Multiple Qt branches on Coverity Scan
> On 3 oct. 2016, at 23:09, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > On segunda-feira, 3 de outubro de 2016 22:42:23 CEST Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote: >> I'd say we should at least get 5.6 and dev covered (we can then bikeshed >> on the naming -- "stable" and "dev"?). What do you think? > > Please do. That's a good idea, even if we don't have a lot of people looking > at those results, any help is good. > > I think the names should be "5.6" or "lts", the other one stays named as it > is. > > -- > 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 Hi, I’d go for LTS, this way it’s clearer why it’s covered and doesn’t need to be changed in the future. Samuel signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
Re: [Development] Multiple Qt branches on Coverity Scan
On segunda-feira, 3 de outubro de 2016 23:09:39 CEST Thiago Macieira wrote: > I think the names should be "5.6" or "lts", the other one stays named as it > is. Maybe "lts" is better because we can then reuse the project for the next LTS, whenever that happens. -- 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] Multiple Qt branches on Coverity Scan
On segunda-feira, 3 de outubro de 2016 22:42:23 CEST Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote: > I'd say we should at least get 5.6 and dev covered (we can then bikeshed > on the naming -- "stable" and "dev"?). What do you think? Please do. That's a good idea, even if we don't have a lot of people looking at those results, any help is good. I think the names should be "5.6" or "lts", the other one stays named as it is. -- 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
