---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/100607/#review1595
---
Ship it!
The actual objects that turned up/JSON that got produc
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/100607/
---
(Updated Feb. 22, 2011, 5:06 p.m.)
Review request for Amarok.
Changes
--
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/100607/
---
(Updated Feb. 22, 2011, 4:30 p.m.)
Review request for Amarok.
Changes
--
> On Feb. 8, 2011, 2:36 a.m., Andy Coder wrote:
> > This seems reasonable enough to me. Especially since JsonQt was used
> > because it was already hanging around in the source tree, and availability
> > of friendly JSON libraries in package repos wasn't what it is today.
> > However, if the
> On Feb. 8, 2011, 2:36 a.m., Andy Coder wrote:
> > This seems reasonable enough to me. Especially since JsonQt was used
> > because it was already hanging around in the source tree, and availability
> > of friendly JSON libraries in package repos wasn't what it is today.
> > However, if the
> On Feb. 8, 2011, 2:36 a.m., Andy Coder wrote:
> > This seems reasonable enough to me. Especially since JsonQt was used
> > because it was already hanging around in the source tree, and availability
> > of friendly JSON libraries in package repos wasn't what it is today.
> > However, if the
> On Feb. 8, 2011, 2:36 a.m., Andy Coder wrote:
> > This seems reasonable enough to me. Especially since JsonQt was used
> > because it was already hanging around in the source tree, and availability
> > of friendly JSON libraries in package repos wasn't what it is today.
> > However, if the
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/100607/
---
(Updated Feb. 20, 2011, 10:51 p.m.)
Review request for Amarok.
Changes
-
On Windows we have to package every dependency including 3party lib our
salve.
And AFAIK we already build/package QJson :)
On 8 February 2011 17:50, Stefan Derkits wrote:
>This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/100607/
>
> On February 8
> On Feb. 8, 2011, 2:36 a.m., Andy Coder wrote:
> > This seems reasonable enough to me. Especially since JsonQt was used
> > because it was already hanging around in the source tree, and availability
> > of friendly JSON libraries in package repos wasn't what it is today.
> > However, if the
> On Feb. 8, 2011, 2:36 a.m., Andy Coder wrote:
> > This seems reasonable enough to me. Especially since JsonQt was used
> > because it was already hanging around in the source tree, and availability
> > of friendly JSON libraries in package repos wasn't what it is today.
> > However, if the
> On Feb. 8, 2011, 2:36 a.m., Andy Coder wrote:
> > This seems reasonable enough to me. Especially since JsonQt was used
> > because it was already hanging around in the source tree, and availability
> > of friendly JSON libraries in package repos wasn't what it is today.
> > However, if the
> On Feb. 8, 2011, 2:36 a.m., Andy Coder wrote:
> > This seems reasonable enough to me. Especially since JsonQt was used
> > because it was already hanging around in the source tree, and availability
> > of friendly JSON libraries in package repos wasn't what it is today.
> > However, if the
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/100607/#review1304
---
This seems reasonable enough to me. Especially since JsonQt was
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/100607/
---
Review request for Amarok.
Summary
---
What I did:
-) added cmake/mod
15 matches
Mail list logo
