Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Kornel Benko]

Am Mittwoch, 13. Januar 2016 um 23:20:35, schrieb Enrico Forestieri 

> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 02:44:27PM +0100, Kornel Benko wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 13. Januar 2016 um 14:41:04, schrieb Kornel Benko 
> > 
> > > Am Mittwoch, 13. Januar 2016 um 00:47:57, schrieb Enrico Forestieri 
> > > 
> > > > I am not aware of any significant issues with 5.5.1 on Windows, while
> > > > 5.6.0beta introduces a new issue on all platforms. Namely, one cannot
> > > > change shortcuts through the gui in Preferences->Editing->Shortcuts.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Could you make an example? I just tried Qt5.6beta on linux, and cannot see
> > > the problem.
> > > Shortcuts are saved. After restarting lyx, I can still see the new 
> > > shotcuts.
> > 
> > What I see is that the keys used for a shortcut are doubled though.
> 
> Instead, I cannot introduce any shortcut. All key presses are ignored.
> For me, this happens on both Windows and Linux.

Today I saw similar behaviour with QT5.5.1 ignoring some control keys. After 
killing the ibus-daemon I could again modify shortcuts.
But the behaviour for QT5.6 did not change, keys are still doubled.

Kornel


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Scott Kostyshak]

On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 01:32:15AM +0100, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> Am 16.01.2016 um 16:58 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:
> 
> >Uwe, I know you do not have much time but are you willing to make both
> >installers? It seems there is help available for both the MSVC and mingw
> >if you get stuck.
> 
> To repeat, the installer is completely independent of the compiler! So if
> you fear bugs in the installer, it is there, no matter how LyX was built.

Indeed, you are right.

> Please push beta1 right now.

We have two other issues we are trying to fix before beta.

Scott


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Uwe Stöhr]

Am 16.01.2016 um 16:58 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:


Uwe, I know you do not have much time but are you willing to make both
installers? It seems there is help available for both the MSVC and mingw
if you get stuck.


To repeat, the installer is completely independent of the compiler! So 
if you fear bugs in the installer, it is there, no matter how LyX was built.


As I wrote, I have a very well tested installer ready and won't invest 
another week to dive into the compiler business. it is also not 
necessary to release a beta. LyX 2.2 is very stable in my experience and 
it is sufficient that users use it and give us feedback.


Please push beta1 right now.

regards Uwe

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Uwe Stöhr]

Am 16.01.2016 um 16:21 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:


We need to figure out the MSVC vs. mingw issue before releasing beta.


What for an issue? I am using the MSVC2010 build now for many hours 
writing a scientific paper and to work on the docs. I cannot see a 
special problem.



don't think it would be a good idea to release one and then switch to
the other for final release. We have seen many installer-related issues
in the past


What has the compiler to do with the installer? What installer-related 
issues do you remember except of my mistake with alpha2?


regards Uwe

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Peter Kümmel]

Am 18. Januar 2016 01:32:15 MEZ, schrieb "Uwe Stöhr" :
>Am 16.01.2016 um 16:58 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:
>
>> Uwe, I know you do not have much time but are you willing to make
>both
>> installers? It seems there is help available for both the MSVC and
>mingw
>> if you get stuck.
>
>To repeat, the installer is completely independent of the compiler! So 
>if you fear bugs in the installer, it is there, no matter how LyX was
>built.
>
>As I wrote, I have a very well tested installer ready and won't invest 
>another week to dive into the compiler business. it is also not 
>necessary to release a beta. LyX 2.2 is very stable in my experience
>and 
>it is sufficient that users use it and give us feedback.
>
>Please push beta1 right now.

Do you plan to rebuild the installer after the official beta commit? Nobody 
knows which changed are not in the already uploaded installer because since 
then there were commits.

>
>regards Uwe

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Jean-Marc Lasgouttes]

We could also release both, one as the main and the other as backup.

JMarc

Le 16 janvier 2016 16:21:15 GMT+01:00, Scott Kostyshak  a 
écrit :
>We need to figure out the MSVC vs. mingw issue before releasing beta. I
>don't think it would be a good idea to release one and then switch to
>the other for final release. We have seen many installer-related issues
>in the past so it seems it is a fragile part that would not be good to
>change after beta. I am interested in other opinions though.
>
>Scott

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Scott Kostyshak]

On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 01:10:06AM +0100, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> Am 15.01.2016 um 03:39 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:
> 
> >>Give me another day to test but I think that I am basically ready for beta1.
> >
> >Sounds good to me.
> 
> I tested it a lot today on different PCs and from my point of view it is
> stable. So I am ready for beta1.

We need to figure out the MSVC vs. mingw issue before releasing beta. I
don't think it would be a good idea to release one and then switch to
the other for final release. We have seen many installer-related issues
in the past so it seems it is a fragile part that would not be good to
change after beta. I am interested in other opinions though.

Scott


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Scott Kostyshak]

On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 04:56:01PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> We could also release both, one as the main and the other as backup.

+1

Uwe, I know you do not have much time but are you willing to make both
installers? It seems there is help available for both the MSVC and mingw
if you get stuck.

Scott

> JMarc
> 
> Le 16 janvier 2016 16:21:15 GMT+01:00, Scott Kostyshak  a 
> écrit :
> >We need to figure out the MSVC vs. mingw issue before releasing beta. I
> >don't think it would be a good idea to release one and then switch to
> >the other for final release. We have seen many installer-related issues
> >in the past so it seems it is a fragile part that would not be good to
> >change after beta. I am interested in other opinions though.
> >
> >Scott
> 


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Uwe Stöhr]

Am 15.01.2016 um 03:39 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:


Give me another day to test but I think that I am basically ready for beta1.


Sounds good to me.


I tested it a lot today on different PCs and from my point of view it is 
stable. So I am ready for beta1.


regards Uwe

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Scott Kostyshak]

On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 12:10:45AM +0100, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
> Am 14.01.2016 um 02:33 schrieb Uwe Stöhr:
> 
> >I also prepared an installer to test it further:...
> 
> I found some issues that I already fixed. This new installer passes my
> tests:
> http://ftp.lyx.de/LyX%202.2.0-test/LyX-220git-14-01-2016-Installer-1.exe
> 
> Give me another day to test but I think that I am basically ready for beta1.

Sounds good to me.

Scott


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Uwe Stöhr]

Am 14.01.2016 um 02:33 schrieb Uwe Stöhr:


I also prepared an installer to test it further:...


I found some issues that I already fixed. This new installer passes my 
tests:

http://ftp.lyx.de/LyX%202.2.0-test/LyX-220git-14-01-2016-Installer-1.exe

Give me another day to test but I think that I am basically ready for beta1.

regards Uwe

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Stephan Witt]

Am 13.01.2016 um 02:06 schrieb Richard Heck :
> 
> On 01/12/2016 06:32 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>> Dear all,
>> 
>> There is a question of whether we should release our binary for Windows
>> compiled against Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6.0.
>> 
>> My opinion is that we should release it with 5.5.1, unless there is a
>> known, significant issue that affects LyX for 5.5.1 *on Windows* and
>> that would be solved with 5.6.0.
>> 
>> There are two reasons behind my opinion. In general, I trust a point
>> release more and also I do not want to depend on there not being any
>> delays in the final Qt 5.6 release. The current scheduled date is
>> February 9th [1]. There have been many delays in the past (e.g. the beta
>> was delayed by more than 2 months) so I would not be surprised if there
>> were more in the future. Although it is true that LyX might be delayed
>> also for other reasons, we should not plan on this because that would
>> cause even further delays.
>> 
>> One reason that is against my opinion though, is that Qt 5.6 is going to
>> be a long-term release. It is not exactly clear how this will play out
>> since it is the first long-term release by Qt, from what I understand.
>> However, it would indeed (if there weren't the problems I mentioned
>> above) be nice to have the whole LyX 2.2.x series compiled against
>> 5.6.x. For example, we might be able to upgrade from 5.6.0 to 5.6.2 from
>> e.g. LyX 2.2.4 to 2.2.5 with more confidence than e.g. 5.5.1 to 5.6.2.
>> However, I still think the points above outweigh this benefit.
>> 
>> What do others think?

Under these conditions I’d prefer the use of Qt 5.5.1 over a 5.6.0 too.

> Perhaps one relevant point here is that we have often released a new
> minor version pretty quickly. Once 2.2.0 is out, we'll start to get bug
> reports. 2.1.1 came out two and half months after 2.1.0, for example. So
> we can always move to 5.6.x along the way. Obviously, we would want to
> do some testing, but it would even be possible to release builds with
> both 5.5.x and 5.6.x.

This is what I’ve thought too. The change of the Qt version from one
LyX patch release to another is not a real problem. But that
shouldn’t happen from beta to release version of LyX, IMO.

Stephan

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Kornel Benko]

Am Mittwoch, 13. Januar 2016 um 14:41:04, schrieb Kornel Benko 
> Am Mittwoch, 13. Januar 2016 um 00:47:57, schrieb Enrico Forestieri 
> 
> > On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 06:32:11PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > > Dear all,
> > > 
> > > There is a question of whether we should release our binary for Windows
> > > compiled against Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6.0.
> > > 
> > > My opinion is that we should release it with 5.5.1, unless there is a
> > > known, significant issue that affects LyX for 5.5.1 *on Windows* and
> > > that would be solved with 5.6.0.
> > 
> > I am not aware of any significant issues with 5.5.1 on Windows, while
> > 5.6.0beta introduces a new issue on all platforms. Namely, one cannot
> > change shortcuts through the gui in Preferences->Editing->Shortcuts.
> > 
> 
> Could you make an example? I just tried Qt5.6beta on linux, and cannot see 
> the problem.
> Shortcuts are saved. After restarting lyx, I can still see the new shotcuts.

What I see is that the keys used for a shortcut are doubled though.

Kornel

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Kornel Benko]

Am Mittwoch, 13. Januar 2016 um 00:47:57, schrieb Enrico Forestieri 

> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 06:32:11PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > Dear all,
> > 
> > There is a question of whether we should release our binary for Windows
> > compiled against Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6.0.
> > 
> > My opinion is that we should release it with 5.5.1, unless there is a
> > known, significant issue that affects LyX for 5.5.1 *on Windows* and
> > that would be solved with 5.6.0.
> 
> I am not aware of any significant issues with 5.5.1 on Windows, while
> 5.6.0beta introduces a new issue on all platforms. Namely, one cannot
> change shortcuts through the gui in Preferences->Editing->Shortcuts.
> 

Could you make an example? I just tried Qt5.6beta on linux, and cannot see the 
problem.
Shortcuts are saved. After restarting lyx, I can still see the new shotcuts.

Kornel

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Enrico Forestieri]

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 02:44:27PM +0100, Kornel Benko wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 13. Januar 2016 um 14:41:04, schrieb Kornel Benko 
> 
> > Am Mittwoch, 13. Januar 2016 um 00:47:57, schrieb Enrico Forestieri 
> > 
> > > I am not aware of any significant issues with 5.5.1 on Windows, while
> > > 5.6.0beta introduces a new issue on all platforms. Namely, one cannot
> > > change shortcuts through the gui in Preferences->Editing->Shortcuts.
> > > 
> > 
> > Could you make an example? I just tried Qt5.6beta on linux, and cannot see
> > the problem.
> > Shortcuts are saved. After restarting lyx, I can still see the new shotcuts.
> 
> What I see is that the keys used for a shortcut are doubled though.

Instead, I cannot introduce any shortcut. All key presses are ignored.
For me, this happens on both Windows and Linux.

-- 
Enrico

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Uwe Stöhr]

Am 13.01.2016 um 00:32 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:


There is a question of whether we should release our binary for Windows
compiled against Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6.0.


Hi Scott and Peter,

as the consensus is to use 5.5.1 I worked on that. I could compile LyX 
2.2git with Qt 5.5.1 and MSVC 2010 successfully. I also prepared an 
installer to test it further:

http://ftp.lyx.de/LyX%202.2.0-test/LyX-220git-13-01-2016-Installer-1.exe

Please give me 2 days to test. If nothing unexpected occurs I will then 
be ready for beta1.


Peter, if you could kindly test it on Windows too, it would help me. 
Please test the following:

- modifying of LyX preferences (e.g. changing the menu language)
- Spell Checking
- viewing a new file as PDF that contains a SVG, PDF and a JPG image
- viewing the EmbeddedObjects manual from the Help menu and look if the 
index was correctly created in the PDF


many thanks and regards
Uwe

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Peter Kümmel]

Am 13.01.2016 um 09:43 schrieb Stephan Witt:


What do others think?


Under these conditions I’d prefer the use of Qt 5.5.1 over a 5.6.0 too.


OK, I updated the batch script to use Qt 5.5.1.




Perhaps one relevant point here is that we have often released a new
minor version pretty quickly. Once 2.2.0 is out, we'll start to get bug
reports. 2.1.1 came out two and half months after 2.1.0, for example. So
we can always move to 5.6.x along the way. Obviously, we would want to
do some testing, but it would even be possible to release builds with
both 5.5.x and 5.6.x.


This is what I’ve thought too. The change of the Qt version from one
LyX patch release to another is not a real problem. But that
shouldn’t happen from beta to release version of LyX, IMO.

Stephan

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Peter Kümmel]

Am 13. Januar 2016 01:46:35 MEZ, schrieb Scott Kostyshak :
>On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 01:31:59AM +0100, Peter Kümmel wrote:
>> Am 13. Januar 2016 00:32:11 MEZ, schrieb Scott Kostyshak
>:
>> >Dear all,
>> >
>> >There is a question of whether we should release our binary for
>Windows
>> >compiled against Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6.0.
>> >
>> 
>> It is not very complicated to switch between these two versions. So
>just let see how the timing becomes.
>
>Although I am very open since I am not knowledgeable on this topic, I
>would be quite hesitant to switch between 5.5.1 and 5.6.0 after beta. I
>am not worried about how easy it is to switch in terms of compiling
>(that is a separate set of concerns that I am not convinced are
>trivial). I'm worried about Qt bugs. I have seen many Qt bugs affect
>LyX. But I suppose we can have that discussion if the circumstances
>permit (e.g. LyX has not been released by the time Qt 5.6.0 final has
>been released, and the bug Enrico sees was fixed in Qt 5.6.0 final).


Yes, this bug looks like a show stopper for 5.6.
>
>Scott

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Richard Heck]

On 01/12/2016 06:32 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> There is a question of whether we should release our binary for Windows
> compiled against Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6.0.
>
> My opinion is that we should release it with 5.5.1, unless there is a
> known, significant issue that affects LyX for 5.5.1 *on Windows* and
> that would be solved with 5.6.0.
>
> There are two reasons behind my opinion. In general, I trust a point
> release more and also I do not want to depend on there not being any
> delays in the final Qt 5.6 release. The current scheduled date is
> February 9th [1]. There have been many delays in the past (e.g. the beta
> was delayed by more than 2 months) so I would not be surprised if there
> were more in the future. Although it is true that LyX might be delayed
> also for other reasons, we should not plan on this because that would
> cause even further delays.
>
> One reason that is against my opinion though, is that Qt 5.6 is going to
> be a long-term release. It is not exactly clear how this will play out
> since it is the first long-term release by Qt, from what I understand.
> However, it would indeed (if there weren't the problems I mentioned
> above) be nice to have the whole LyX 2.2.x series compiled against
> 5.6.x. For example, we might be able to upgrade from 5.6.0 to 5.6.2 from
> e.g. LyX 2.2.4 to 2.2.5 with more confidence than e.g. 5.5.1 to 5.6.2.
> However, I still think the points above outweigh this benefit.
>
> What do others think?

Perhaps one relevant point here is that we have often released a new
minor version pretty quickly. Once 2.2.0 is out, we'll start to get bug
reports. 2.1.1 came out two and half months after 2.1.0, for example. So
we can always move to 5.6.x along the way. Obviously, we would want to
do some testing, but it would even be possible to release builds with
both 5.5.x and 5.6.x.

Richard

Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Scott Kostyshak]

Dear all,

There is a question of whether we should release our binary for Windows
compiled against Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6.0.

My opinion is that we should release it with 5.5.1, unless there is a
known, significant issue that affects LyX for 5.5.1 *on Windows* and
that would be solved with 5.6.0.

There are two reasons behind my opinion. In general, I trust a point
release more and also I do not want to depend on there not being any
delays in the final Qt 5.6 release. The current scheduled date is
February 9th [1]. There have been many delays in the past (e.g. the beta
was delayed by more than 2 months) so I would not be surprised if there
were more in the future. Although it is true that LyX might be delayed
also for other reasons, we should not plan on this because that would
cause even further delays.

One reason that is against my opinion though, is that Qt 5.6 is going to
be a long-term release. It is not exactly clear how this will play out
since it is the first long-term release by Qt, from what I understand.
However, it would indeed (if there weren't the problems I mentioned
above) be nice to have the whole LyX 2.2.x series compiled against
5.6.x. For example, we might be able to upgrade from 5.6.0 to 5.6.2 from
e.g. LyX 2.2.4 to 2.2.5 with more confidence than e.g. 5.5.1 to 5.6.2.
However, I still think the points above outweigh this benefit.

What do others think?

Scott

[1]
https://wiki.qt.io/Qt-5.6-release


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Enrico Forestieri]

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 06:32:11PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> There is a question of whether we should release our binary for Windows
> compiled against Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6.0.
> 
> My opinion is that we should release it with 5.5.1, unless there is a
> known, significant issue that affects LyX for 5.5.1 *on Windows* and
> that would be solved with 5.6.0.

I am not aware of any significant issues with 5.5.1 on Windows, while
5.6.0beta introduces a new issue on all platforms. Namely, one cannot
change shortcuts through the gui in Preferences->Editing->Shortcuts.

-- 
Enrico

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Peter Kümmel]

Am 13. Januar 2016 00:32:11 MEZ, schrieb Scott Kostyshak :
>Dear all,
>
>There is a question of whether we should release our binary for Windows
>compiled against Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6.0.
>

It is not very complicated to switch between these two versions. So just let 
see how the timing becomes.

>My opinion is that we should release it with 5.5.1, unless there is a
>known, significant issue that affects LyX for 5.5.1 *on Windows* and
>that would be solved with 5.6.0.
>
>There are two reasons behind my opinion. In general, I trust a point
>release more and also I do not want to depend on there not being any
>delays in the final Qt 5.6 release. The current scheduled date is
>February 9th [1]. There have been many delays in the past (e.g. the
>beta
>was delayed by more than 2 months) so I would not be surprised if there
>were more in the future. Although it is true that LyX might be delayed
>also for other reasons, we should not plan on this because that would
>cause even further delays.
>
>One reason that is against my opinion though, is that Qt 5.6 is going
>to
>be a long-term release. It is not exactly clear how this will play out
>since it is the first long-term release by Qt, from what I understand.
>However, it would indeed (if there weren't the problems I mentioned
>above) be nice to have the whole LyX 2.2.x series compiled against
>5.6.x. For example, we might be able to upgrade from 5.6.0 to 5.6.2
>from
>e.g. LyX 2.2.4 to 2.2.5 with more confidence than e.g. 5.5.1 to 5.6.2.
>However, I still think the points above outweigh this benefit.
>
>What do others think?
>
>Scott
>
>[1]
>https://wiki.qt.io/Qt-5.6-release

Re: Windows: release with Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6?

[Scott Kostyshak]

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 01:31:59AM +0100, Peter Kümmel wrote:
> Am 13. Januar 2016 00:32:11 MEZ, schrieb Scott Kostyshak :
> >Dear all,
> >
> >There is a question of whether we should release our binary for Windows
> >compiled against Qt 5.5.1 or 5.6.0.
> >
> 
> It is not very complicated to switch between these two versions. So just let 
> see how the timing becomes.

Although I am very open since I am not knowledgeable on this topic, I
would be quite hesitant to switch between 5.5.1 and 5.6.0 after beta. I
am not worried about how easy it is to switch in terms of compiling
(that is a separate set of concerns that I am not convinced are
trivial). I'm worried about Qt bugs. I have seen many Qt bugs affect
LyX. But I suppose we can have that discussion if the circumstances
permit (e.g. LyX has not been released by the time Qt 5.6.0 final has
been released, and the bug Enrico sees was fixed in Qt 5.6.0 final).

Scott


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature