Hi all,
We have now soft branched '5.9' from 'dev'. Target is to have final downmerge
from 'dev' to '5.9' and Qt 5.9 Feature Freeze 1st of February.
Please finalize ongoing changes in 'dev' and start using '5.9' for new changes
targeted to Qt 5.9.0 release.
Make sure all Qt 5.9.0 new features
Em quarta-feira, 25 de janeiro de 2017, às 17:47:15 PST, Thomas Søndergaard
escreveu:
> Hi,
>
> I can see there is code in tests that depending on e.g. Q_OS_WIN32 and
> Q_OS_UNIX conditionally includes, for the platform, universally available
> headers like . I would like to add a unit test that
Hi,
I can see there is code in tests that depending on e.g. Q_OS_WIN32 and
Q_OS_UNIX conditionally includes, for the platform, universally available
headers like . I would like to add a unit test that requires
checking state on the native window behind QWindow. Doing this on windows
with Q_OS_WIN3
Hello Release Team!14:29, 23 January 2017 г., List for announcements regarding Qt releases and development :Hi all,Qt 5.8.0 and Qt Creator 4.2.1 releases are out! For details please see the blog post (http://blog.qt.io/blog/2017/01/23/qt-5-8-released/, http://blog.qt.io/blog/2017/01/23/qt-creator-
On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:21:09AM +0100, Edward Welbourne wrote:
> However, you seem to be talking about *release* 5.x.0 rather than the
> *branch* of that name, so I'm not really clear on what you're talking
> about.
>
i don't know how you arrived at this conclusion, but it isn't relevant
to my
René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> IOW, I'll need to find a way to build that systray app in such a way that it
> contains RUNPATH instead of RPATH.
>
> Is that what qmake 5.8.0 should do with the patch from this codereview in
> place?
Answer: no, it doesn't. I installed the 5.8.0RC build from the testi
> On 25 Jan 2017, at 10:21, Edward Welbourne wrote:
>
> I have never heard of these amends lines; where are they
> explained ? In any case, users may find a change interesting even if
> there is no specific earlier commit that can be pinned down as what this
> new change amends - sometimes, th
On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 03:38:11PM +0100, Edward Welbourne wrote:
>>> Proposal: Check for [ChangeLog] entries in a 5.x branch _after 5.x.0
>>> branched_. Is that easy to enable/disable?
>>
>> It should be easy to detect that 5.x.0 "has branched" - check for
>> existence of either origin/5.x.0 branc