Hi Thiago,
I will have a look today.
Olli
On 16/02/2020 19:30, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-82166
>
> The bug report says:
> qmap.h(1213): error C2244: "QMultiMap::insert": Keine Übereinstimmung für
> Funktionsdefinition mit vorhandener Deklaration gefunden [..
On 18/2/20 6:03 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
I'm with Alexandru here: all ideas to have more states in JIRA start with a
good intentions, but eventually people stop using them and just transition
through all stages in one go when they've finished the work. For example,
people realise they've neve
On 17/2/20 7:13 PM, Edward Welbourne wrote:
So I'd like to modify our Jira work-flows to include a distinct "In
Review" state for when I've completed the main work and am either
waiting for review or responding to reviewers' comments. Of course, if
those comments prompt me to go back and start
QProcess *process = new QProcess();
QStringList progargs;
progargs << "/C" << "start C:\\ProgramData\\Microsoft\\Windows\\myapp.exe
dicom:get C:\\Slicer\\Testing\\Data\\Input\\DWIDicom\\
On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 at 14:18, Marc Mutz via Development
wrote:
>
> On 2020-02-16 19:32, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > On Saturday, 15 February 2020 06:23:52 PST Marc Mutz via Development
> > wrote:
> >> C++20 will contain new classes with emit() member functions
> >> (wg21.link/P0053). While that wil
On Monday, 17 February 2020 09:11:59 PST Jason H wrote:
> Though I have not tried it, I would suggest Ansible and
> https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTIFW-166 , notably
> https://code.qt.io/cgit/qbs/qbs.git/tree/scripts/install-qt.sh
>
> I use the install script and it was cake. However, I don't kn
On Monday, 17 February 2020 01:20:43 PST Alexandru Croitor wrote:
> Last time I brought this up, I was told that it would complicated the states
> / transitions, and was deemed won't fix.
>
> I hope you have more luck.
I'm with Alexandru here: all ideas to have more states in JIRA start with a
g
On Monday, 17 February 2020 03:14:55 PST Karsten Heimrich wrote:
> Still this does not mean we should move on without rethinking the
> possibility of using std:: smart pointers in newly created API's; either in
> new modules and or to a given extent in existing ones. Thus I would like to
> propose
Sorry, this just occurred to me. This is a request for 5.15 feature freeze
exception.
Re: https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-17331
Re: 97645478de3ceffce11f58eab140c4c775e48be5
("QProcess: use FFD_USE_FORK when the class is not QProcess itself")
The bug report is complaining that the use of fo
On Sunday, 16 February 2020 10:30:41 PST Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Is there a volunteer to help figuring this out? I'm strapped for time and
> access to the 2017 compiler is limited for me.
Alternative: drop support for MSVC 2017. It is known to have a serious
variable initialisation regression co
Though I have not tried it, I would suggest Ansible and
https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTIFW-166 , notably
https://code.qt.io/cgit/qbs/qbs.git/tree/scripts/install-qt.sh
I use the install script and it was cake. However, I don't know how much longer
this will be supported with the changed Lars
> From: Development On Behalf Of Sze
> Howe Koh
>
> Another use case: Mass deployment to multiple PCs:
> https://forum.qt.io/topic/111587/classroom-deployment-of-qt-for-multiple-
> pcs-and-for-all-users-windows
>
This mass-deployment is the use case that concerns me most of all. I have 45
de
Hi,
as it seems we will not be able to reach a broader consent on the usage of
std:: smart pointers in our current API because of several reasons:
* the resulting API might be inconsistent
* slow adaptation in user code after the massive API change
* current legacy code base is to huge to adapt
Sounds like a good idea.
It also would be nice to integrate this change with gerrit somehow. For
example, if you push non-WIP changes and add reviewers, an associated
task should be moved to "In Review" state automatically.
On 2/17/20 10:13 AM, Edward Welbourne wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We currently
Hi,
Last time I brought this up, I was told that it would complicated the states /
transitions, and was deemed won't fix.
I hope you have more luck.
> On 17. Feb 2020, at 10:13, Edward Welbourne wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> We currently have an "In Progress" state. In practice when I work on an
>
Hi all,
We currently have an "In Progress" state. In practice when I work on an
issue, I initially do the work, then put that up for review; the review
phase takes up fragments of my time for a while, unlike the main work
phase, which is closer to full-time. I have more control over (and a
bette
16 matches
Mail list logo
