Review Request 114537: Fix progressbar's busy animation with QtQuickControls
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114537/ --- Review request for kde-workspace and Hugo Pereira Da Costa. Repository: kde-workspace Description --- This makes the animated busy state of QtQuickControls' progressbar actually move. Diffs - kstyles/oxygen/animations/oxygenbusyindicatorengine.cpp da4d67e kstyles/oxygen/oxygenstyle.cpp cf371ca Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114537/diff/ Testing --- Tested QQC gallery and QWidget5 gallery, both works correctly. Thanks, Martin Klapetek
Re: Nepomuk in 4.13 and beyond
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:07:18PM +0100, Jos Poortvliet wrote: Unless somebody knows a web service which can judge the value of a word that internet users seem to attach to it or something like that :D Just because I'm a bit bored atm. I found such a site: http://i.imgur.com/OkIHqGv.png Not that it means anything. :-P -- Martin Sandsmark
Re: Nepomuk in 4.13 and beyond
On Tuesday 17 Dec 2013 12:22:26 Todd wrote: On Dec 12, 2013 6:36 PM, Vishesh Handa m...@vhanda.in wrote: i’ll say it again here so that it is at least on record: i really disagree with renaming Nepomuk. call it Nepomuk 2 or whatever, but tossing aside name recognition and years of messaging is doing the promo teams a massive disservice. i hope that Baloo remains a technology name well hidden from both users and developers. It will remain hidden. I am a bit confused by this. You say it will remain hidden, but the emails I am seeing are calling for the outright removal of Nepomuk api calls and replacing them with baloo API calls. This does not seen very hidden from developers. I meant that it will remain hidden to the users. Not developers. Further, you talk about disabling Nepomuk in system settings. This does not seem very hidden from users. So, although I cannot speak for him, I am not sure Aaron's branding concerns are being addressed. Now if this was keeping the Nepomuk namespace and billing baloo as a replacement for virtuoso, then I could see this as being hidden, even with substantial changes in how the APIs actually work. But not when both APIs and user settings are being renamed. The User settings are still called Desktop Search. In fact the KCM is a near duplicate of the Nepomuk one. The Nepomuk API was heavily based around RDF. Moving away from RDF meant redesigning the APIs. If any news site catches wind of this, I don't see how they could present it as anything other than an outright abandonment of Nepomuk, and once that view gets spread around the web no amount of branding later will change it. -- Vishesh Handa
Re: frameworks build instructions wrong / won't work with kubuntu 14.04
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Harald Sitter sit...@kde.org wrote: tldr: in ubuntu 14.04 automoc will (currently does) fall over dead with a qt5 built according to frameworks build instructions. what to do? xnox was nice enough to look into this in detail and identified the problem as having a much smaller scope than I had originally thought. In particular this should *not* affected non-distro Qt builds that are used in manual builds (i.e. not using dpkg build tools). A solution/improvement for the existing issue is being worked on and should work as expected in the final. HS
Re: frameworks build instructions wrong / won't work with kubuntu 14.04
Harald Sitter wrote: xnox was nice enough to look into this in detail and identified the problem as having a much smaller scope than I had originally thought. 1) What is the problem? 2) Why does the package creation result in broken cmake files generated from the Qt tarball? Thanks, Steve.
Re: frameworks build instructions wrong / won't work with kubuntu 14.04
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Stephen Kelly steve...@gmail.com wrote: Harald Sitter wrote: xnox was nice enough to look into this in detail and identified the problem as having a much smaller scope than I had originally thought. 1) What is the problem? Essentially this change: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/159659245/cmake_2.8.12.1-1ubuntu1_2.8.12.1-1ubuntu2.diff.gz As far as I understand it (which isn't very far) a) it includes ubuntu's MultiArchCross.cmake toolchain all the time for just about every cmake project b) semi-hardcodes qmake/moc/rcc to the system Qt path /usr/lib/$architecturetriplet/... when env DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH is set (which apparently is always the case when building a package on ubuntu) Should be fixed as per: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/160197164/cmake_2.8.12.1-1ubuntu2_2.8.12.1-1ubuntu3.diff.gz 2) Why does the package creation result in broken cmake files generated from the Qt tarball? The files (or rather paths set in there) are simply overridden as per the cross compilation stuff described above. Since you want the host architecture tooling (e.g. i386) but the qt cmake config would point to the target tooling (e.g. arm), so it's a matter of incomplete logic of when to force these values as the main env var is set all the time. But I suggest you ask xnox directly about the motivation behind the toolchain file. HS
Re: Review Request 114537: Fix progressbar's busy animation with QtQuickControls
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114537/#review45932 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Hugo Pereira Da Costa On Dec. 19, 2013, 11:18 a.m., Martin Klapetek wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114537/ --- (Updated Dec. 19, 2013, 11:18 a.m.) Review request for kde-workspace and Hugo Pereira Da Costa. Repository: kde-workspace Description --- This makes the animated busy state of QtQuickControls' progressbar actually move. Diffs - kstyles/oxygen/animations/oxygenbusyindicatorengine.cpp da4d67e kstyles/oxygen/oxygenstyle.cpp cf371ca Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114537/diff/ Testing --- Tested QQC gallery and QWidget5 gallery, both works correctly. Thanks, Martin Klapetek
Re: Review Request 114537: Fix progressbar's busy animation with QtQuickControls
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114537/#review45934 --- This review has been submitted with commit 0d2361353741642364111db9df2553eea6c99663 by Martin Klapetek to branch master. - Commit Hook On Dec. 19, 2013, 11:18 a.m., Martin Klapetek wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114537/ --- (Updated Dec. 19, 2013, 11:18 a.m.) Review request for kde-workspace and Hugo Pereira Da Costa. Repository: kde-workspace Description --- This makes the animated busy state of QtQuickControls' progressbar actually move. Diffs - kstyles/oxygen/animations/oxygenbusyindicatorengine.cpp da4d67e kstyles/oxygen/oxygenstyle.cpp cf371ca Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114537/diff/ Testing --- Tested QQC gallery and QWidget5 gallery, both works correctly. Thanks, Martin Klapetek
Re: Review Request 114537: Fix progressbar's busy animation with QtQuickControls
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114537/ --- (Updated Dec. 19, 2013, 3:44 p.m.) Status -- This change has been marked as submitted. Review request for kde-workspace and Hugo Pereira Da Costa. Repository: kde-workspace Description --- This makes the animated busy state of QtQuickControls' progressbar actually move. Diffs - kstyles/oxygen/animations/oxygenbusyindicatorengine.cpp da4d67e kstyles/oxygen/oxygenstyle.cpp cf371ca Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114537/diff/ Testing --- Tested QQC gallery and QWidget5 gallery, both works correctly. Thanks, Martin Klapetek
Re: frameworks build instructions wrong / won't work with kubuntu 14.04
On 12/19/2013 07:45 PM, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: 2) Why does the package creation result in broken cmake files generated from the Qt tarball? The package creation does not result in broken cmake files generated from the Qt tarball. Great. It's just there is no clean way to override some of the chosen (hardcoded at Qt buildtime) paths, instead of at buildtime against multiple, possibly partial, stacks of Qts. I can think of several questions to ask/things to point out in response to this, but as you answered my above question already, I think I'll step back out of the thread instead. Thanks, Steve.
Re: frameworks build instructions wrong / won't work with kubuntu 14.04
On 12/19/2013 07:45 PM, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: I am also not sure yet, if a cross-moc is required or whether a native moc binary can be re-used. It's one of the open questions that I still have, and need to investigate the actual code generator / code generated. Even if the code generated is 'portable' today, there is no guarantee it will remain so. The appropriate action for you to take, therefore, is not to read the code, but to discuss it/the problem you are trying to solve on the mailing list. Thanks, Steve.
