On Wednesday October 21 2015 13:08:46 Dominik Haumann wrote:
> In Windows, such a package manager does not exist. KDE tried to create
> such a package manager through the emerge/KDE Windows installer, but
> this is non-standard [on Windows] and simply not what users want.
That's not entirely accu
Am 22.10.2015 um 19:24 schrieb René J.V. Bertin:
> On Thursday October 22 2015 18:48:30 Marko Käning wrote:
>
>> have you followed the discussion with Qt's developers regarding the QSP
>> patch [1]?
>> If not, I advise you to do a little reading there!
>> Qt won’t ever support such an approach,
Thanks René and Jeremy,
On 22 Oct 2015, at 22:43 , Jeremy Whiting wrote:
> ...It sounds like a good solution for embedding a copy of Qt next
> to each application for windows use (and maybe for osx use too if
> resources don't make it completely unneccessary), but not for the
> macports shared Q
Yeah, if we go that direction on mac it would be fine for bundled Qt,
but not for shared Qt. It would make all applications that use qt5-mac
or qt5-kde or whatnot use linuxy paths or not. It's a runtime switch,
so not very helpful if you've installed stuff to linuxy paths and then
let the user choo
On Thursday October 22 2015 22:05:59 Marko Käning wrote:
> > https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-44473?focusedCommentId=272971&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-272971)
> > Because the proposal supports environment variables too, I guess this
> > would
Sorry Ralf,
On 22 Oct 2015, at 21:54 , Ralf Habacker wrote:
> In the related bug I proposed to extended qt.conf support to cover
> QStandardPaths too, which does also not alter the defaults (wich is the
> case if qt.conf is not present) and would be highly customizable.
> (see
> https://bugrepor
Hi René,
On 22 Oct 2015, at 19:24 , René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> Not exactly, no. The patch was rejected in the presented form, but we were
> invited to file a bug report (I think it's
> https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-44473). Here we (me, IIRC) managed to
> make the case for special needs
On Thursday October 22 2015 18:48:30 Marko Käning wrote:
> have you followed the discussion with Qt's developers regarding the QSP patch
> [1]?
> If not, I advise you to do a little reading there!
> Qt won’t ever support such an approach, i.e. one would have to patch it, if
> KDE itself doesn’t
Hi Ralf,
On 22 Oct 2015, at 08:35 , Ralf Habacker wrote:
> umbrello for example depends on about 50 other libraries and packages
> https://build.opensuse.org/project/show/home:rhabacker:branches:windows:mingw:win32:KF511.
> Not patching Qt requires to repack every single package :-(, by either
>
On Wednesday October 21 2015 22:12:00 Christoph Cullmann wrote:
> Maybe, but actually, even with the most dumb application bundle I have
> created ATM
> all stuff together is around 50 MB compressed and installed 125 MB.
>
> This includes a more or less complete Qt (with webkit, some debug plugi
On Tuesday October 20 2015 13:29:21 Jeremy Whiting wrote:
>applications. I can also see the same power users recommending
>individual applications to their relatives (moms, grandmothers, etc.)
>using single application installers as you described. "Here mom,
>download this one bundle to install kx
Please, hold this poll in the user communities (as far as they exist), and not
only among the developers.
That is of course if you're doing all this with the requirements of the people
who'll end up using your stuff foremost in mind.
I think you'll find that many if not most Mac users don't car
12 matches
Mail list logo
