Re: [Development] Requesting a repository for Qt Interface Framework Reference APIs

You are absolutely correct that this module started with a pure automotive focus, back then called Qt IVI. However, we recognized that its functionality can also be utilized in a generic way, which was the reason for the rename and generalization efforts done in the past. There might still be

Re: [Development] Raising the minimum to C++20

> On 04.05.23 08:52, Maurice Kalinowski via Development wrote: > [...] > > This is the situation we experience in multiple industries still, with an > increasing pressure from multiple angles to get those finally supporting Qt 6. > Hence, things are getting bett

Re: [Development] Raising the minimum to C++20

> container still sailing from China. That obviously can't be the case. > [Maurice Kalinowski] I would not go that far, but in some industries you are somewhat in that situation. When we prepared scoping for Qt 6, we were discussing with the OS vendors on the C++17 situation and when w

Re: [Development] Raising the minimum to C++20

As Marc already mentioned, we are having troubles with users not being able to upgrade on various platforms. We even have customers who are not able to upgrade to C++17 yet due to supply chain issues. Basically, the idea from our end has been to take a two-step approach by first enabling

Re: [Development] qt6 qml to c++ compilation

compiler > > The output of strings $binary includes the whole qml file like in Qt 5.15. > My question is, Qt6 is supposed to compile this directly to c++ code. > Will that still include the whole qml code? [Maurice Kalinowski] You are right, that we are planning to have a QML to C++ co

Re: [Development] Feature freeze next Tuesday

For better discussion, let's have a look at the existing patches: > * QIM::multidata https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtbase/+/302905 Currently +2, waiting for integration > * QKeyCombination + removal of operator+(QFlags, *) https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtbase/+/297566

Re: [Development] Untangling our platform plugins

built directly into QtGui as a static plugin. > > > the logical consequence of the above would be statically linking the plugins > on all platforms. or, for that matter, throwing out the pretense of plugins > and > just make it a regular factory, to the degree it even makes sen

Re: [Development] Proposal: more Jira states to track stages of the work on an issue

Hi, Just adding in another vote for introducing a “In Review/Integration” state. As a disclaimer, I am working in the same team as Eddy. The reason I see it beneficial is to have better visibility on the progress of working on a certain task. Eddy already made it clear that while something is

Re: [Development] Migrate QStateMachine from Qt Core

two cents though:) [Maurice Kalinowski] Yup, we checked on this and also considered it to be… suboptimal to have one based on the other. Maurice ___ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] The future of smart pointers in Qt API

> From: Development On Behalf Of > André Pönitz > Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2020 8:00 PM > To: Allan Sandfeld Jensen > Cc: development@qt-project.org > Subject: Re: [Development] The future of smart pointers in Qt API > > On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 05:08:33PM +0100, Allan Sandfeld Jensen

[Development] QtCS2019 Notes: Qt for Python and beyond

Hi, Following the notes from the Qt for Python session - Continuation of the plenary session - Right now status is same as PyQt - What can we do to make a difference and improve on QtfP - Tooling ○ Around pyside and… ○ Make it

[Development] QtCS19 Notes: Remote display of Qt applications in Qt 6

Hi, Following the notes taken on the remote display session: - Qt5 has webgl and vnc - Use-case duplicate displays ○ One local ○ One remote - TQtC Hackathon project ○ Stream the scene graph to another machine - Multi

Re: [Development] Nominating Sona Kurazyan as approver

+1 From: Development On Behalf Of Ryan Chu Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 3:16 PM To: development@qt-project.org Subject: Re: [Development] Nominating Sona Kurazyan as approver +1 from Ryan Best regards, Ryan From: Development

Re: [Development] Qt wrapper for UPC UA Server stack (open62541)

Hey Juan, That certainly looks interesting. Are you aware of the Qt OpcUA module? https://github.com/qt/qtopcua Right now it focusses on the client side, but long term servers might become more important for us. Especially the gateway scenario of converting classic and proprietrary protocols

Re: [Development] Qt Multimedia maintainer change

+1 (same employer disclaimer) Maurice > -Original Message- > From: Development On Behalf Of > Shawn Rutledge > Sent: Thursday, February 7, 2019 3:10 PM > To: development@qt-project.org > Subject: Re: [Development] Qt Multimedia maintainer change > > +1 > > > On 7 Feb 2019, at 14:23,

Re: [Development] Intention of dropping UWP 2015 x86 builds in favour of MinGW 32-bit packages

The mail did not state 5.12.x. Hence it was under the assumption "as always" with the next minor release. Maurice > -Original Message- > From: Jani Heikkinen > Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 12:54 PM > To: Jesus Fernandez ; Maurice Kalinowski > ; Simon Hausm

Re: [Development] Intention of dropping UWP 2015 x86 builds in favour of MinGW 32-bit packages

I think what Jesus refers to is patch level releases. We’ve been changing binary packages for platforms within minor releases so far, but not for patch level ones. Maurice From: Development On Behalf Of Simon Hausmann Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 9:19 AM To: Jesus Fernandez Cc:

Re: [Development] Qt 5.13 feature freeze is getting closer

Well even for TP there should be some consensus on whether it should be part of Qt or not, no? We are lacking documentation on the process here, all I could find was https://wiki.qt.io/Creating_a_new_module_or_tool_for_Qt#Graduating_from_the_Playground. “This decision is done on the

[Development] Nominating Jannis Völker for Approver

Hi, I would like to nominate Jannis Völker for approvership. He has been an active contributor to Qt OpcUA mostly since end of 2017. He also has been actively taking care on JIRA, bug fixing and bringing the whole module forward. If you're curious, here is a list of his changes:

Re: [Development] qt open62541 client connection signals doesn't receive from backend class

Hi, Are you sure that the backend is loaded properly? Check QOpcUaProvider::availableBackends() and/or whether the client creation causes any issues. Furthermore, I assume you have been using the documentation from Open62541 itself? The default build generates a shared library, which needs to

Re: [Development] Support for Windows Arm64 Desktop Target

Hi Thomas, Thanks for looking into this. In case your patches are ready, we’d be eager to review them following our guidelines at https://wiki.qt.io/Qt_Contribution_Guidelines https://wiki.qt.io/Setting_up_Gerrit Talking about installers, that might be more complicated. For Windows we provide

Re: [Development] How to run QtBase autotests on a remote machine?

Hi, > >> Currently I build the tests and then scp individual tst_foo binaries >> > to the > host and run them manually. In order to fix the initial porting >> problems > that > will show up in most tests this is fine. > > > > Some tests shall need more than the binary; e.g. data files to

[Development] Proposing Oliver Wolff as platform maintainer for UWP

er reflect reality. https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/owner:%22Oliver+Wolff+%253Coliver.wolff%2540qt.io%253E%22,n,z BR, Maurice P.S.: Perhaps he manages to get sufficient agreement to be mentioned on the maintainer list, contrary to me when I took it over from Andrew :) -- Maurice Kalinowski

Re: [Development] [Qt-creator] Requesting repository for telemetry plugin in Qt Creator

“The idea is to develop a generic library/plugin, which anyone could use for analytics” If that is the case, then qt-creator/telemetry is the wrong repository to ask for. If you are aiming at something generic, then it should be qt/ Maurice Von: Qt-creator

Re: [Development] Prebuilt 32-bit versjon for MSVC 2017

The reason we have had x86 and x64 packages for UWP is not to target those two architectures for the desktop, but rather that the x86 version also works for the emulators for Windows Phone 8 / Windows 10 Mobile as well as Windows 10 IoT (Core). Given that two out of those are basically gone by

Re: [Development] QtCoap: QNAM-like API or not

able to do so otherwise. Therefore, until there's DTLS, > the > API is Technology Preview and subject to change. So I don't feel we need to > review it yet. I have not spent any time myself. > [Maurice Kalinowski] I guess having it as Technology Preview for a first release is the usual way t

Re: [Development] Nominating Lorenz Haas for approver

+1 Maurice > -Original Message- > From: Development [mailto:development- > bounces+maurice.kalinowski=qt...@qt-project.org] On Behalf Of André > Hartmann > Sent: Sunday, November 5, 2017 6:01 PM > To: qt-crea...@qt-project.org; development@qt-project.org > Cc: Lorenz Haas

[Development] Repository request: Qt KNX and Qt KMQTT

of the project: Qt KNX Responsible person: Karsten Heimrich Gerrit user/email: karsten.heimr...@qt.io Desired repository name: qtknx Name of the project: Qt MQTT Responsible person: Maurice Kalinowski Gerrit user/email: maurice.kalinow...@qt.io Desired repository name: qtmqtt Best Regards

Re: [Development] Adding Qt CoAP

> > > what are you talking about? https://codereview.qt-project.org/201311 is up for > more than a month already. [Kalinowski Maurice] And it is visible now after Frederik moved it. As I wrote in my initial mail, there has been some work done before... Maurice

Re: [Development] Adding Qt CoAP

Hey, > > One of the items mentioned has been CoAP and that it would make a > > great addition to Qt. Interestingly, there has been discussions > > between the Qt Company and Witekio about exactly this topic. Thanks to > > the people at Witekio these resulted in actual code already available > >

[Development] Adding Qt CoAP

Hi everyone, Most of you might have noticed the IoT related discussion happening on this mailing list. If not, check here in the archive: http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2017-August/030723.html One of the items mentioned has been CoAP and that it would make a great addition

Re: [Development] Examples and Demos in qtdoc

So, is this in place now? Just wondering because of some changes getting into the qtdoc repo recently… Maurice From: Development [mailto:development-bounces+maurice.kalinowski=qt...@qt-project.org] On Behalf Of Lars Knoll Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 11:31 AM To: Mitch Curtis

Re: [Development] Proposal to adjust release candidate process

Releasing beta more frequently is a welcomed item, for sure. However, that implies that there is even more packages to test and what has not been discussed is the fact that there are not more people testing. For WinRT the situation has been that Olli and I needed to test

Re: [Development] [Announce] Qt VS Tools (Beta) released

Done. Maurice From: Development [mailto:development-bounces+maurice.kalinowski=qt...@qt-project.org] On Behalf Of Alan Ezust Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2017 5:49 PM To: development@qt-project.org; Alessandro Portale Subject: Re: [Development] [Announce] Qt VS Tools

Re: [Development] Proposal to adjust release candidate process

Hence, Technology Preview Preview Release Preview Release Candidate Release \o/ Maurice Von: Development [mailto:development-bounces+maurice.kalinowski=qt...@qt-project.org] Im Auftrag von Marco Bubke Gesendet: Wednesday, December 21, 2016 4:21 PM An: Thiago Macieira

Re: [Development] Qt 5.9

> > - For WinRT/WinPhone I propose to drop WinRT 8.1 and WinPhone 8.1 > support & start using term UWP (Universal Windows platform). It means also > dropping msvc 2013 from WinRT/WinPhone; UWP only supports msvc2015 > > Absolutely agree. [Kalinowski Maurice] Start using the term UWP in our

Re: [Development] Qt 5.9

> On quarta-feira, 23 de novembro de 2016 08:10:36 PST Jake Petroules wrote: > > > The currently sold CPU's are not really the measurement stick here. > > > The measurement stick is actually installed Win 32 systems. > > Yes, but what's the 32-bit Windows install base which is capable of > >

Re: [Development] Whether Qt5.8 support Visual Studio '15' now?

VS 15 is not released yet, and with 5.8 beta soon to be released, there are some time constraints to check for it. Hence any feedback in advance is nice. Maybe Thiago has been able to look into it. Generally, latest at its release support will be available, probably (given track record)

Re: [Development] Help! configure won't configure on Windows

Quoting from another mail (haven't verified myself but rather reverted the patch Thiago mentioned locally): "Change https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/168922/ is required. Unfortunately it's not yet in, apparently partly due to the gerrit troubles." Maurice > -Original Message- >

Re: [Development] Revisiting high-DPI configuration options

> 2) Handling fractional scale factors > > This is relevant for e.g. a Windows setting of 250%, corresponding to a scale > factor of 2.5. Presenting a fractional scale factor to the app may cause > graphics glitches, so we round it to the nearest integer, using qRound. > > However,

Re: [Development] QtSingleApplication in Qt proper?

> > +1 from me to add this to QtCore [Kalinowski Maurice] What is the purpose of adding those items to QtCore? Is it that it "feels" more stable when it is inside that module, or because you need this feature on a regular basis? At least personally, I never needed to implement a service, yet

Re: [Development] Qt 5.8 branching & Feature Freeze

Hi, Another option might be to do it the same way like we do for UWP currently due to limited resources on the CI system. There we have at least a compile check every time qt5.git integration is supposed to happen. This is bare minimum, but at least guarantees that compilation will work for

Re: [Development] QMovie no longer supports .mng

> > As a distribution packager, I think that's a good plan. :-) The people > > on proprietary operating systems seem less happy about that, as > > evidenced by this thread. But that's not MY problem… ;-) > > Indeed. > > If we want the binaries to include the builds, we could include the DLLs for