Re: [Development] Removal of some of the blacklisted (non-working) autotests?

till all ears if you have other improvement ideas about the autotests. - Milla From: Jedrzej Nowacki Sent: Friday, November 4, 2016 10:10 AM To: development@qt-project.org Cc: Milla Pohjanheimo Subject: Re: [Development] Removal of some of the blacklisted (non

[Development] Removal of some of the blacklisted (non-working) autotests?

ity of Qt and the autotests play an essential role in spotting the possible defects quickly, so let's keep Qt in a good shape without unnecessarily burdening our CI system. In hope of getting feedback from you, Milla Pohjanheimo (the official autotest snoop in the Qt Company) Blacklisted t

[Development] Common consensus about isExposed()?

It looks like isExposed() has it's own interpretation of the implementation on each platform. See bug: https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-53252 "isExposed() returns true also if window minimized or completely covered". Our autotests are heavily relying on the result of qWaitForWindowExposed()

[Development] g++ 5.2.1 compiler bug

We bumped into a compiler bug specific for g++ 5.2.1 when running CI for dev branch on RHEL 7.2 (gcc 5.2.1). Nested structs don't get their constructors called under some circumstances. See: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=67550. A possible workaround for the issue can be found fr