Re: [Development] Proposal for Qt 5.10 platforms and configurations changes

> On Apr 27, 2017, at 11:28 PM, Lars Knoll wrote: > > >> On 27 Apr 2017, at 16:59, Jake Petroules wrote: >> >>> >>> On Apr 27, 2017, at 7:07 AM, Tuukka Turunen wrote: >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Related to the Apple platforms,

[Development] Getting QtWebEngineProcess.app to run in sandbox after being signed

I have a desktop app that I have been trying to get onto the Mac App store but I have been having problems getting it to run in sandbox mode. For context I am (preferably) using Qt 5.8 running on macOS 10.11.6. The crux seems to be QtWebEngineProcess.app refuses to run after I codesign the

Re: [Development] Proposal for Qt 5.10 platforms and configurations changes

> On Apr 27, 2017, at 11:54 PM, Shawn Rutledge wrote: > > >> On 27 Apr 2017, at 16:59, Jake Petroules wrote: >> >> Anyways, iOS 11 will likely drop support for 32-bit applications entirely >> (i.e. they will not launch because 32-bit system libs

Re: [Development] Proposal for Qt 5.10 platforms and configurations changes

On Friday, 28 April 2017 09:51:58 -03 Benjamin TERRIER wrote: > 2017-04-28 14:23 GMT+02:00 Thiago Macieira : > > On Friday, 28 April 2017 03:56:22 -03 Jani Heikkinen wrote: > >> Yes, MSVC 2017 is already supported in Qt 5.9 and we are trying to get > >> pre-built

Re: [Development] Setting CMAKE_PREFIX_PATH to Qt prefix breaks use of system ICU via CMake

On Friday, 28 April 2017 11:54:53 -03 Konstantin Tokarev wrote: > Hello, > > There is a strange situation involving official Qt SDK (>=5.8.0) binaries > for Linux, ICU, cmake, and WebKit project files, I'm not sure which side > really needs to be fixed. > > (Qt)WebKit uses custom module to find

Re: [Development] Proposal for Qt 5.10 platforms and configurations changes

On 28 April 2017 at 13:51, Benjamin TERRIER wrote: > 2017-04-28 14:23 GMT+02:00 Thiago Macieira : > > On Friday, 28 April 2017 03:56:22 -03 Jani Heikkinen wrote: > >> Yes, MSVC 2017 is already supported in Qt 5.9 and we are trying to get > >>

Re: [Development] Introductions?

Christian Kandeler (28 April 2017 16:19) > I see one +1 and one -2. ah - sorry - I though that one was off-list. Andre: do you feel your concern is addressed by my clarified proposal ? Eddy. ___ Development mailing list

Re: [Development] [docs] changing the way overloads are documented and presented

Op 28/04/2017 om 15:48 schreef Martin Smith: >> I am a bit worried about having a good way to describe the specifics of a >> >specific overload or group thereof. > Remember you will still have the option of giving an overload its own qdoc > comment instead of including it in the common \fn

[Development] Setting CMAKE_PREFIX_PATH to Qt prefix breaks use of system ICU via CMake

Hello, There is a strange situation involving official Qt SDK (>=5.8.0) binaries for Linux, ICU, cmake, and WebKit project files, I'm not sure which side really needs to be fixed. (Qt)WebKit uses custom module to find ICU, you can see its code at [1]. Module uses quite popular practise of

Re: [Development] Introductions?

On 04/28/2017 04:05 PM, Edward Welbourne wrote: > On 25 April 2017 at 10:09 I wrote (inter alia): >> [...] the same is relevant for any approver or maintainer: perhaps we >> should tweak our process for introducing candidates for those stations >> within the community; ask that each introduce self

Re: [Development] Introductions?

On 25 April 2017 at 10:09 I wrote (inter alia): > [...] the same is relevant for any approver or maintainer: perhaps we > should tweak our process for introducing candidates for those stations > within the community; ask that each introduce self in the course of it > - possibly *after* we've made

Re: [Development] DBus signals for (dlclose'd) style plugin causing crash during application exit?

On Friday April 28 2017 12:27:48 Shawn Rutledge wrote: >That says that this fixes it https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/161056/ and >that in turn says that https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/180232/ is the >equivalent for 5.8. So I suppose we’d better get it into 5.9 then, right?

Re: [Development] [docs] changing the way overloads are documented and presented

>I am a bit worried about having a good way to describe the specifics of a >>specific overload or group thereof. Remember you will still have the option of giving an overload its own qdoc comment instead of including it in the common \fn comment. martin

Re: [Development] [docs] changing the way overloads are documented and presented

Op 28/04/2017 om 09:35 schreef Marc Mutz: > Hi. > > TL;DR: I propose to document overloaded functions with a single comment block, > containing multiple \fn's and a common documentation text, to be rendered as > one documentation block preceded by a listing of all the \fn's, instead of as >

Re: [Development] Proposal for Qt 5.10 platforms and configurations changes

2017-04-28 14:23 GMT+02:00 Thiago Macieira : > On Friday, 28 April 2017 03:56:22 -03 Jani Heikkinen wrote: >> Yes, MSVC 2017 is already supported in Qt 5.9 and we are trying to get >> pre-built binaries available before final release; let's see if we can >> make it

Re: [Development] DBus signals for (dlclose'd) style plugin causing crash during application exit?

> On 28 Apr 2017, at 11:32, René J.V. Bertin wrote: > > Hello, > > Together with the principal maintainer I am looking into issues in a style > plugin related to its use of DBus (to be informed of desktop-wide changes): > > https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=363753

Re: [Development] DBus signals for (dlclose'd) style plugin causing crash during application exit?

On Friday, 28 April 2017 06:32:04 -03 René J.V. Bertin wrote: > Together with the principal maintainer I am looking into issues in a style > plugin related to its use of DBus (to be informed of desktop-wide changes): > > https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=363753 Before I read any of the rest:

Re: [Development] Proposal for Qt 5.10 platforms and configurations changes

On Friday, 28 April 2017 03:56:22 -03 Jani Heikkinen wrote: > Yes, MSVC 2017 is already supported in Qt 5.9 and we are trying to get > pre-built binaries available before final release; let's see if we can > make it happen I remember a discussion about whether we needed MSVC 2017 binaries in the

Re: [Development] Proposal for Qt 5.10 platforms and configurations changes

>> Something like the following seems nice: >> Tier 1 - the most rigorously tested configurations, tested in CI >> Tier 2 - we actively try to make it work but it's a lower priority; >> will make and accept patches and provide support but isn't tested in >> CI >> Unsupported - we remove code

Re: [Development] Heads up - 5.9 string freeze

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 09:41:08AM +, Jani Heikkinen wrote: > Hi, > > As informed a week a go string freeze for Qt 5.9 is now in effect. So please, > no changes to translatable strings from this point, unless approved by the > documentation team. > btw, the "unless approved by the

[Development] DBus signals for (dlclose'd) style plugin causing crash during application exit?

Hello, Together with the principal maintainer I am looking into issues in a style plugin related to its use of DBus (to be informed of desktop-wide changes): https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=363753 The ticket above is about a reproducible issue in a custom cleanup handler that is designed

Re: [Development] [docs] changing the way overloads are documented and presented

> On 28 Apr 2017, at 09:35, Marc Mutz wrote: > > Hi. > > TL;DR: I propose to document overloaded functions with a single comment block, > containing multiple \fn's and a common documentation text, to be rendered as > one documentation block preceded by a listing of all the

Re: [Development] [docs] changing the way overloads are documented and presented

I haven't looked at all of it, but +1 on the general idea. martin From: Development on behalf of Sean Harmer Sent: Friday, April 28, 2017 10:07:46 AM To:

Re: [Development] [docs] changing the way overloads are documented and presented

On Friday 28 April 2017 09:35:09 Marc Mutz wrote: > What do you think? I like the idea. +1 Sean -- Dr Sean Harmer | sean.har...@kdab.com | Managing Director UK KDAB (UK) Ltd, a KDAB Group company Tel. +44 (0)1625 809908; Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090 Mobile: +44 (0)7545 140604 KDAB - Qt Experts

[Development] [docs] changing the way overloads are documented and presented

Hi. TL;DR: I propose to document overloaded functions with a single comment block, containing multiple \fn's and a common documentation text, to be rendered as one documentation block preceded by a listing of all the \fn's, instead of as individual functions. Since I learned that a qdoc comment

Re: [Development] Proposal for Qt 5.10 platforms and configurations changes

Hi, Yes, MSVC 2017 is already supported in Qt 5.9 and we are trying to get pre-built binaries available before final release; let's see if we can make it happen br, jani From: Development on

Re: [Development] Proposal for Qt 5.10 platforms and configurations changes

> On 27 Apr 2017, at 16:59, Jake Petroules wrote: > > Anyways, iOS 11 will likely drop support for 32-bit applications entirely > (i.e. they will not launch because 32-bit system libs will be GONE). So I > agree we should stop shipping 32-bit slices in our binary

Re: [Development] Proposal for Qt 5.10 platforms and configurations changes

Hi, Exactly cutting down the time it takes for the CI to complete a build of all of Qt is one of the motivation factors. And note how in dev (and bus 5.10) we are spending extra time building for WatchOS and TvOS, so it would seem like a trade to me ;) Simon On 28. Apr 2017, at 08:28, Lars

Re: [Development] Proposal for Qt 5.10 platforms and configurations changes

Hi Jake, On joi, 27 aprilie 2017 15:00:58 EEST Jake Petroules wrote: > > On Apr 27, 2017, at 7:40 AM, BogDan Vatra wrote: > > > > For Android I'd like to support 64 bit platforms (arm and x86) > > > They are already supported. Feel free to compile Qt with the

Re: [Development] Proposal for Qt 5.10 platforms and configurations changes

On 27 Apr 2017, at 16:59, Jake Petroules > wrote: On Apr 27, 2017, at 7:07 AM, Tuukka Turunen > wrote: Hi, Related to the Apple platforms, could we consider the following for Qt 5.10: - Drop