Re: [Development] Qt5 binary installers

Hi, I have tryed windows version sdk : the install works but : - plugins and import qml have only debug dll ... there is no release version (all normal dll have release version) .. I have the same issue building from git on windows. - plugins to play movie on windows is not build (no directshow

Re: [Development] Fixing input for eglfs and friends

Hi, sorry had no network connection yesterday. On Thursday, May 24, 2012 06:51:32 AM Agocs Laszlo.P wrote: > Hi, > > Please do not merge the plug-ins. A monolithic "evdev" monster plug-in is > not desirable and would certainly not classify as "generic" anymore. > > The "static device discovery"

[Development] qpa api - current status

Hi, Here's the current status of the proposed plan of action for QPA api. 1. We drop _qpa completely. So, it would become qplatformbackingstore.h Status: Done 2. We teach syncqt that qplatform* is special and we move them all to a special qpa/ directory. So, instead of #include , it will be #incl

[Development] Nominating Miikka Heikkinen for Approver status

Hi, I would like to nomimate Miikka Heikkinen from Digia for Approver status. He has been working on Qt 5 on Windows for a quite a while and has fixed numerous issues and failing test cases in the areas QWidget/QWindow, fonts, Vista style and QML and is currently working on the daunting task t

Re: [Development] Approver status

On 25.05.2012 12:29, andre.poen...@nokia.com wrote: > > Sven Anderson: >> I also don't think fixed numbers in rules are very wise. What about >> offering some moving average stats of various metrics somewhere (maybe >> they already exist?) and just referring to them in the rules as a guide >> line?

Re: [Development] Fixing input for eglfs and friends

Hi Jorgen, On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 11:12 PM, Jørgen Lind wrote: > >> I think that's a valid point :-) They are all inside qtbase because of >> convenience. The build system wasn't and still isn't very friendly >> when it comes to creating separate modules. > > I honestly dont understand this poin

Re: [Development] Approver status

I believe that trust in the work is what we want to measure. The maintainers and approvers should indicate and vote for members to become approvers or maintainers. As trust is a subjective measure, numbers of bugs fixed and their relevance will be implicitly considered as their criteria. Br, On F

Re: [Development] Binary incompatible changes to Qt 4.8

On May 24, 2012, at 3:22 PM, ext Turunen Tuukka wrote: > > On 24.5.2012 15.32, "Thiago Macieira" wrote: > >> On quinta-feira, 24 de maio de 2012 12.13.31, Yan Shapochnik wrote: >>> Since you are back porting this change to 4.8, I would also like to >>> make a >>> suggestion and include Mac OS X

Re: [Development] Approver status

On 25.5.2012 13.29, "andre.poen...@nokia.com" wrote: > >The idea was not to have an over-engineered system of random rules, and >also >not to introduce a _scale_, but an extemely low and obviously reasonable >cut-off >point as a minimal barrier of entrance, serving as a guideline for the >peopl

Re: [Development] Approver status

Sven Anderson: > I also don't think fixed numbers in rules are very wise. What about > offering some moving average stats of various metrics somewhere (maybe > they already exist?) and just referring to them in the rules as a guide > line? That's more dynamic and adapts to the different activity l

Re: [Development] topic branch feature in Gerrit

On 05/24/2012 01:33 PM, ext Thiago Macieira wrote: > On quinta-feira, 24 de maio de 2012 13.10.23, Sergio Ahumada wrote: >> - for all projects ? >> - for some projects as a pilot ? which projects ? >> - for a dummy project so people can test it before going live ? > > I'd like to see it in qtbase,

Re: [Development] Approver status

Hi, On 25.05.2012 09:34, André Somers wrote: > Bottom line: let's not introduce rules that are supposed to solve > problems that have not occured, and that are likely to cause more > problems than they might ever prevent occuring in the first place. I > would like to stimulate people to make the m

Re: [Development] Approver status

Op 25-5-2012 11:53, Sylvain Pointeau schreef: On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Laszlo Papp > wrote: > I think that defining fixed number of LOC or hours spend on > the project is not going to work. Please don't go there. I fully agree. I can understand th

Re: [Development] Approver status

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Laszlo Papp wrote: > > I think that defining fixed number of LOC or hours spend on > > the project is not going to work. Please don't go there. > > I fully agree. I can understand the other Andre's point as well, but I > think those are really not too helpful m

Re: [Development] Should we change the default codec of QTextStream to UTF-8?

On 5/25/12 9:37 AM, "ext Thiago Macieira" wrote: >On sexta-feira, 25 de maio de 2012 06.27.05, lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote: >> On 5/24/12 11:38 PM, "ext Thiago Macieira" >> >> wrote: >> >On quinta-feira, 24 de maio de 2012 13.15.16, 1+1=2 wrote: >> >> If we want to bootstrap tool such as qmake s

Re: [Development] Approver status

On 5/25/12 9:41 AM, "ext Thiago Macieira" wrote: >On sexta-feira, 25 de maio de 2012 06.27.13, lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote: >> I agree with Andre. Currently we do not have any guiding criteria in >> place, so it's probably difficult to judge when someone is ready to be >> nominated as an approver

Re: [Development] Current qt5 version from git does not compile

> I wrote > >I'm having a similar issue, but a bit farther off the beaten path. I'm > >on > VS2008, but trying to cross compile for Wince. > > Found the issue. > > The problem was the parameters for syncqt. [...] > Setting QTDIR to the qtbase of my shadow build > dir fixed the problem. > Setting

Re: [Development] Approver status

> I think that defining fixed number of LOC or hours spend on > the project is not going to work. Please don't go there. I fully agree. I can understand the other Andre's point as well, but I think those are really not too helpful measurements to introduce unfortunately. Perhaps, I need to begi

Re: [Development] Approver status

Op 25-5-2012 9:34, André Somers schreef: > Hi, > > Op 25-5-2012 8:27, lars.kn...@nokia.com schreef: >> I agree with Andre. Currently we do not have any guiding criteria in >> place, so it's probably difficult to judge when someone is ready to be >> nominated as an approver. We've now had one or tw

Re: [Development] Approver status

On sexta-feira, 25 de maio de 2012 06.27.13, lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote: > I agree with Andre. Currently we do not have any guiding criteria in > place, so it's probably difficult to judge when someone is ready to be > nominated as an approver. We've now had one or two cases where people > where b

Re: [Development] Should we change the default codec of QTextStream to UTF-8?

On sexta-feira, 25 de maio de 2012 06.27.05, lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote: > On 5/24/12 11:38 PM, "ext Thiago Macieira" > > wrote: > >On quinta-feira, 24 de maio de 2012 13.15.16, 1+1=2 wrote: > >> If we want to bootstrap tool such as qmake support utf8 > > > >Why would we want to? > > One reason co

Re: [Development] Approver status

Hi, Op 25-5-2012 8:27, lars.kn...@nokia.com schreef: > I agree with Andre. Currently we do not have any guiding criteria in > place, so it's probably difficult to judge when someone is ready to be > nominated as an approver. We've now had one or two cases where people > where being nominated a bi