[Development] QtCS 2018: Third-party and security policy

There's a session scheduled for Monday (unless it gets moved). Here's what I will propose. 0) Where not really necessary, delete the third-party code and force the use of a system library (see assimp discussion, can be applied to qtimageformats too). 1) Third-party bundled should be opt-in,

Re: [Development] Did we have to remove cmake's qt5_use_modules?

> -Original Message- > From: Development [mailto:development-bounces+kai.koehne=qt.io@qt- > [...] > The Qt promise is to maintain not only source code, but upward binary > compatibility until a major version. > > When said promise is broken immediately after a major version release, as it

Re: [Development] Did we have to remove cmake's qt5_use_modules?

On Friday, 8 June 2018 07:59:10 PDT Kevin Funk wrote: > I would lean towards restoring qt5_use_modules() in Qt 5.11.1 (and keep it > for the Qt5 lifetime). But I'd leave the other removals of > 02ed1b36daebed5f3997bb676cf5e818c0db9d3c (mainly removal of support of older > CMake versions) intact. >

Re: [Development] Did we have to remove cmake's qt5_use_modules?

On Thursday, 7 June 2018 08:03:40 CEST Thiago Macieira wrote: > Commit 02ed1b36daebed5f3997bb676cf5e818c0db9d3c was > > Remove CMake code for CMake < 3.1 > > This removes the following functions from Qt5CoreMacros: > - qt5_use_modules(...) > > Which follows 2013's

Re: [Development] Pinging Marco Bubke for QTCREATORBUG-20401 - Allow to build with system's SQLite

The Sqlite module is not a plugin but a library. It is linked to a plugin but this plugin is not build in release and normally disabled. Like I said, it can be simply not build for release. Please stick to KISS. On June 8, 2018 16:30:19 Edward Welbourne wrote: > Marco Bubke (7 June 2018 19:37)

Re: [Development] Did we have to remove cmake's qt5_use_modules?

Le Wed, 06 Jun 2018 23:03:40 -0700, Thiago Macieira écrivait: >But it appears that in the 5 years since we deprecated it, people have not >stopped using it. Did we have to remove it? Or should we have kept >compatibility until Qt 6? The Qt promise is to maintain not only source code, but

[Development] Maintainers, your action needed: Qt 5.11.1 changes files

Hi, Initial ones here: https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/message:%22Add+changes+file+for+Qt+5.11.1%22,n,z Please do needed updates & get approval as soon as possible; We need to get these in soon to be able to keep our release schedule (final packages next week, release 19.6.2018) br,

Re: [Development] Pinging Marco Bubke for QTCREATORBUG-20401 - Allow to build with system's SQLite

Marco Bubke (7 June 2018 19:37) wrote: > AFAIK the refactoring plugin is disabled for release. Just do the same for > the Sqlite library. Probably better to do as Thiago said: On June 7, 2018 23:54:43 Thiago Macieira wrote: >> So we just need a conditional to disable the building if the

Re: [Development] Do we really need Assimp?

Hi Using system assimp is probably the best scenario indeed. Except I think users would expect install packages to have that enabled so ideally assimp should be installed on CI systems. Mike > On 7 Jun 2018, at 17:24, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer > wrote: > > El jueves, 7 de junio

Re: [Development] Is Qt for Automation available under GPLv3?

Hi, I would like to point out that Qt OPC UA, which is part of Qt for Automation, can also be built with an LGPLv3 license as long as the open62541 backend is used. Regards, Frank Am 08.06.2018 um 07:50 schrieb Alex Blasche: Hi, There are no binaries for open source users. However open