On Friday, 20 de January de 2012 14.24.58, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 06:58:40PM -0200, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > My personal preference, seeing how busy everyone is with 5.0 alone,
> > not to mention 4.8, is the third option. Turning over maintenance does
> > not mean
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 06:58:40PM -0200, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Thursday, 19 de January de 2012 16.49.20, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > So Digia is operating under special conditions right now, due to the
> > lack of Qt4 in Gerrit. Once it stabilises, I'd rather not see Digia
> > release a
On 1/19/12 9:58 PM, "ext Thiago Macieira"
wrote:
>On Thursday, 19 de January de 2012 16.49.20, Thiago Macieira wrote:
>> So Digia is operating under special conditions right now, due to the
>>lack
>> of Qt4 in Gerrit. Once it stabilises, I'd rather not see Digia release
>>a
>> commercial version
Sorry for top posting...
Yes, we are happy to maintain the 4.7 branch, thoug we are not planning more
releases to it unless something comes up.
Let's see where the decision settles, after which we do the needed actions, and
see who from Digia is the best one for this.
Yours,
Tuukka
da
On Jan 19, 2012, at 21:58 , ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> By the way, considering what Ossi said in the other email ("4.7 is closed as
> far as the qt project is concerned [...] [because] fixes are not being
> applied
> to 4.7 first"), the Qt project needs to make a decision:
>
> - reopen the 4
On Thursday, 19 de January de 2012 16.49.20, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> So Digia is operating under special conditions right now, due to the lack
> of Qt4 in Gerrit. Once it stabilises, I'd rather not see Digia release a
> commercial version with a version number that the official Qt doesn't have
>
> the thing is that 4.7 is closed as far as the qt project is concerned.
> we have cemented this decision (made by qt nokia RM) by creating facts -
> fixes are not being applied to 4.7 first, and given the strong
> forward-merge-only preference, this cannot be revised without creating
> ugliness.
>
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 08:55:34PM +0200, ext Robin Burchell wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 8:32 PM, Oswald Buddenhagen
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 08:24:22PM +0200, ext Robin Burchell wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Oswald Buddenhagen
> >> wrote:
> >> > i made an attemp
On 19/01/2012 12:55, ext Robin Burchell wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 8:32 PM, Oswald Buddenhagen
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 08:24:22PM +0200, ext Robin Burchell wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Oswald
>>> Buddenhagen wrote:
i made an attempt to give the digia group
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 8:32 PM, Oswald Buddenhagen
wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 08:24:22PM +0200, ext Robin Burchell wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Oswald Buddenhagen
>> wrote:
>> > i made an attempt to give the digia group on gerrit the right to create
>> > the branch 4.7-digia
On Thursday, 19 de January de 2012 19.32.23, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 08:24:22PM +0200, ext Robin Burchell wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Oswald Buddenhagen
wrote:
> > > i made an attempt to give the digia group on gerrit the right to create
> > > the branch
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 08:24:22PM +0200, ext Robin Burchell wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Oswald Buddenhagen
> wrote:
> > i made an attempt to give the digia group on gerrit the right to create
> > the branch 4.7-digia
>
> why not just put it in 4.7, so they're one and the same,
>
b
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 8:15 PM, Oswald Buddenhagen
wrote:
> i made an attempt to give the digia group on gerrit the right to create
> the branch 4.7-digia
why not just put it in 4.7, so they're one and the same, and nobody
else needs to get confused about where to send things if they want to
con
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 05:21:48PM +0100, ext Daniel Molkentin wrote:
> On 1/19/2012 4:46 PM, ext Turunen Tuukka wrote:
> >In case there is still interest towards 4.7 in the community, we are happy
> >to make the source code available. What way would you prefer? We can, for
> >example, make this av
On 1/19/2012 4:46 PM, ext Turunen Tuukka wrote:
Hi,
We have just released Qt Commercial 4.7.5, which is based on Qt 4.7.4,
additionally containing the fixes from 4.7 branch that were not in
4.7.4, as well as fixes we have backported from 4.8. Overall Qt
Commercial contains 216 fixes to Qt
Hi,
We have just released Qt Commercial 4.7.5, which is based on Qt 4.7.4,
additionally containing the fixes from 4.7 branch that were not in 4.7.4, as
well as fixes we have backported from 4.8. Overall Qt Commercial contains 216
fixes to Qt Commercial 4.7.4, and a few more to LGPL version of
16 matches
Mail list logo
