Great!
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Knoll Lars wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I’m happy to announce that we have just released Qt 5.3.
>
> You can find more details at my blog post at
> http://blog.qt.digia.com/blog/2014/05/20/qt-5-3-released/ .
>
> A big thanks goes to everybody who helped make the
Hi,
I’m happy to announce that we have just released Qt 5.3.
You can find more details at my blog post at
http://blog.qt.digia.com/blog/2014/05/20/qt-5-3-released/ .
A big thanks goes to everybody who helped make the release happen.
Cheers,
Lars
___
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 01:22:54PM -0400, Taylor Braun-Jones wrote:
> I wasn't around for this discussion,
>
so before you dig in yourself deeper, i suggest you actually read it.
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-proj
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 11:01 AM, André Somers wrote:
> Adam Strzelecki schreef op 19-5-2014 12:38:
> >> I would recommend using CMake - it has a stable Ninja generator, which
> >> _does_ make building Qt projects much faster on Windows.
> > I wonder if can CMake build Qt SDK itself?
> >
> > It is
Em seg 19 maio 2014, às 17:01:05, André Somers escreveu:
> Adam Strzelecki schreef op 19-5-2014 12:38:
> >> I would recommend using CMake - it has a stable Ninja generator, which
> >> _does_ make building Qt projects much faster on Windows.
> >
> > I wonder if can CMake build Qt SDK itself?
> >
>
Adam Strzelecki schreef op 19-5-2014 12:38:
>> I would recommend using CMake - it has a stable Ninja generator, which
>> _does_ make building Qt projects much faster on Windows.
> I wonder if can CMake build Qt SDK itself?
>
> It is somehow parallel to Qmake, isn't it. If so, would it make sense to
> Please don't. quick1 is especially usefull on platforms without any OpenGL.
> And quick1 can be built without qtdeclarative. Most of the current
> dependencies are optional, and even qtwebkit depending on qtdeclarative is
> artificial in qt.pro. qtwebkit certainly builds and runs without it in Qt
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 09:16:38AM -0700, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Em qui 15 maio 2014, às 11:28:28, Oswald Buddenhagen escreveu:
> > > This code does not belong into Qt Base,
> >
> > if you accept that the library is an improvement over the 6 copies we
> > have all over the place, the question is
and what about qbs? http://qt-project.org/wiki/qbs
Additionally, was it not supposed to replace QMake at some time?
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
> I would recommend using CMake - it has a stable Ninja generator, which
> _does_ make building Qt projects much faster on Windows.
I wonder if can CMake build Qt SDK itself?
It is somehow parallel to Qmake, isn't it. If so, would it make sense to make
Qt to depreciate Qmake at some point in fav
I would recommend using CMake - it has a stable Ninja generator, which
_does_ make building Qt projects much faster on Windows.
On 19 May 2014 09:57, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 05:29:56PM +0200, Adam Strzelecki wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I wonder if there was any work done in
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 05:29:56PM +0200, Adam Strzelecki wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I wonder if there was any work done in regards of making Ninja Qmake
> generator. From my experience Ninja vastly improves (re)build time.
> I wonder if it would be hard to make such generator,
>
yes. you'd need to do
12 matches
Mail list logo
