Hi Carsten,
Yes, of course. I'll be happy about that.
When you begin?
A small remark: If you know English, then help me to correct issue Wiki on
English spelling in
https://qt-project.org/wiki/QtSerialPort
:)
Best regards,
Denis
09.03.2012, 20:05, "Carsten Breuer" :
> Hi Denis,
>
> I'm inte
Hi all.
Well, what with the Code Review? Who controls it?
I prepared the first review here: http://codereview.qt-project.org/16042
1) Interested in the question about the type of macro QT_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_XXX,
QT_END_NAMESPACE_XXX, etc.
What a way to more correct: leave these macros (as in the e
Hi all.
Yes, most likely LGPL + commercial. So, there is no reason to worry.
Best regards,
Denis
14.02.2012, 04:08, marius.storm-ol...@nokia.com:
> Given that the QSerialDevice developers have accepted the CLA for the project
> effective from start of the project, the project is now open for li
Given that the QSerialDevice developers have accepted the CLA for the project
effective from start of the project, the project is now open for licencing both
under LGPL and commercial license; just like any other module in Qt. AFAIK,
though IANAL.
--
Sent from my Nokia N9
On 2/13/12 16:56 ext
Hi Denis,
I have a question about the license for QSerialDevice. In gitorious it
appears as GPLv3.
I think it could be interesting to have a more permisive licensing
option such as LGPL or BSD. This will allow to push forward this library
compared with others such as QextSerialPort with not es
Hi all.
I prepared for the first QtSerialPort review.
But then I do not know what to do:
Who will review my changes? Who will do the audit?
Someone, please check the code, because I still have not figured much in the
features by:
http://wiki.qt-project.org/Creating_a_new_module_or_tool_for_Qt
On 09/02/2012 13:26, ext Denis Shienkov wrote:
> Hi Marius.
>
> I have a few more questions (or offers):
>
> 1) Perhaps, instead of:
>> ...
>> and start pushing to refs/for/2.0 to the Gerrit repo.
>> ...
> done refs/for/master? Because for the main branch is gerrit master,
> and not 2.0 (or am I mi
Hi Marius.
I have a few more questions (or offers):
1) Perhaps, instead of:
>...
> and start pushing to refs/for/2.0 to the Gerrit repo.
>...
done refs/for/master? Because for the main branch is gerrit master, and not 2.0
(or am I misunderstanding something?).
2) It may be worth in the current
