Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

Scott Kostyshak wrote: > I was wrong---Qt 5.6 beta has now been delayed to 12 November. You can > read the short discussion regarding the delay here: > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.qt.releasing/1826 > We have a few options as to what we should do about LyX 2.2.0 alpha: > > 1. Wait a

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

On Sun, Nov 01, 2015 at 09:37:54PM +0100, Georg Baum wrote: > Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > I was wrong---Qt 5.6 beta has now been delayed to 12 November. You can > > read the short discussion regarding the delay here: > > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.qt.releasing/1826 > > We have a

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 09:29:49PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 06:16:30PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 09:13:12PM +0200, Georg Baum wrote: > > > Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > > > > Any other opinions? > > > > OK sounds like there is enough

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

Scott Kostyshak wrote: > I was wrong---Qt 5.6 beta has now been delayed to 12 November. You can > read the short discussion regarding the delay here: > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.qt.releasing/1826 > We have a few options as to what we should do about LyX 2.2.0 alpha: > > 1. Wait a

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > First, it looks like that the 2010 libraries can work with at least MSVC > 2012. Is that because MSVC 2010 is or was also installed on the same > machine? If so, releasing such a hybrid might give troubles that won't be > foreseen. So, better to warn Uwe as he

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

Am 20.10.2015 um 23:21 schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: Why do you need to update to MSVC 2012 ? Qt 5.5 was still released with 2010 libraries. Given the fact that some of our dependencies are also built with 2010, it looks safest not to switch versions right now. Hi Vincent, I wanted to try

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 02:18:04AM +0200, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Am 20.10.2015 um 23:21 schrieb Vincent van Ravesteijn: > > >Why do you need to update to MSVC 2012 ? Qt 5.5 was still released with > >2010 libraries. Given the fact that some of our dependencies are also built > >with 2010, it looks

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

Gettext is complètement gone. Only iconv remains. JMarc Le 20 octobre 2015 23:29:46 GMT+02:00, Vincent van Ravesteijn a écrit : >Second, I guess it's up to me to figure out compiling the dependencies. >I >remember that Joost had manually changed gettext to be able to make

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Besides this I am still using MSVC 2010. I need to update to MSVC 2012 > or newer and this is another challenge. I already tested MSVC 2012 with > Qt 5.5 with success. Let's see what Qt 5.6 supports and if I can then > still compile LyX 2.1.x with Qt 4.x and MSVC 2010 on the

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

Op 15 okt. 2015 08:37 schreef "Jean-Marc Lasgouttes" : > > Le 15/10/15 01:06, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > >> LyX 2.2.0 and the following 2.2.x releases will still continue to work >> well with Qt 4.8.6 but will also support Qt 5.6, which brings some >> advantages most notably

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

Op 20 okt. 2015 02:32 schreef "Uwe Stöhr" : > > Am 15.10.2015 um 01:18 schrieb Scott Kostyshak: > >> Uwe can you confirm that shipping our alpha with Qt 5.6 beta is >> feasible for you? > > > Hi Scott, > > I am open for anything. I think that i will need in any case some help

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

Op 20 okt. 2015 20:35 schreef "Georg Baum" : > > Uwe Stöhr wrote: > > > Besides this I am still using MSVC 2010. I need to update to MSVC 2012 > > or newer and this is another challenge. I already tested MSVC 2012 with > > Qt 5.5 with success. Let's see what Qt 5.6

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

Am 15.10.2015 um 01:18 schrieb Scott Kostyshak: Uwe can you confirm that shipping our alpha with Qt 5.6 beta is feasible for you? Hi Scott, I am open for anything. I think that i will need in any case some help from Vincent - in the past some Win-only changes were required to be able to

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 02:32:05AM +0200, Uwe Stöhr wrote: > Am 15.10.2015 um 01:18 schrieb Scott Kostyshak: > > >Uwe can you confirm that shipping our alpha with Qt 5.6 beta is > >feasible for you? > > Hi Scott, > > I am open for anything. I think that i will need in any case some help from >

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 06:16:30PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 09:13:12PM +0200, Georg Baum wrote: > > Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > > Any other opinions? > > OK sounds like there is enough of a consensus. From what I understand, > after explanations Liviu is now OK

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

Le 15/10/15 01:06, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : LyX 2.2.0 and the following 2.2.x releases will still continue to work well with Qt 4.8.6 but will also support Qt 5.6, which brings some advantages most notably for users with HiDPI displays. Note that if you compile LyX with a Qt 5 release before

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 08:37:41AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 15/10/15 01:06, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > >LyX 2.2.0 and the following 2.2.x releases will still continue to work > >well with Qt 4.8.6 but will also support Qt 5.6, which brings some > >advantages most notably for users

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 09:20:49AM +0900, Cyrille Artho wrote: >> >> In that case it's a good opportunity to test Qt 5.6 with the next alpha >> release. > > Sounds good. Do note though that it would be Qt 5.6 *beta*. I still > think it makes sense to test our alpha with

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 09:13:12PM +0200, Georg Baum wrote: > Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > Any other opinions? OK sounds like there is enough of a consensus. From what I understand, after explanations Liviu is now OK with this as well. > No, I agree completely. In addition, if our alpha release

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:38:02PM +0200, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > I guess that the release notes for 2.2 needs to be reconsidered anyhow. > This excerpt was just copied from the 2.1 release notes. IIRC Thanks for pointing this out. I cleaned the release notes after the 2.1 release but I

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 07:37:58AM +0200, Stephan Witt wrote: > > Am 13.10.2015 um 02:56 schrieb Scott Kostyshak : > > Stephan and Uwe do you forsee any packaging problems with using Qt 5.6 > > beta as opposed to Qt 5.5 ? > > No. I need only the required disk space and cpu

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

On 10/13/2015 01:37 AM, Stephan Witt wrote: HiDPI is possible with 5.4 too. I've read the Qt folks plan to make 5.6.x a stable release with long term support for older platforms[1]. Stephan It is possible, indeed, but it looks like this

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 12/10/2015 12:38, Liviu Andronic a écrit : >> >> So as far as Trusty users are concerned (likely a big chunk of the >> Ubuntu user base), if 2.2.0 depends on Qt 5.6 they will be locked into >> Qt 4.8 for the

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

Le 12/10/2015 12:38, Liviu Andronic a écrit : So as far as Trusty users are concerned (likely a big chunk of the Ubuntu user base), if 2.2.0 depends on Qt 5.6 they will be locked into Qt 4.8 for the entire 2.2.x series. I don't know if the benefits of depending on Qt 5.6 outweigh such concerns.

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > Qt 5.6 fixes various bugs that affect LyX users. I imagine we will try > to ship our Mac and Windows binaries with it (please speak up if you > disagree). It is scheduled [1] to be released December 8th. Qt 5.6 beta >

When to court Qt 5.6?

Qt 5.6 fixes various bugs that affect LyX users. I imagine we will try to ship our Mac and Windows binaries with it (please speak up if you disagree). It is scheduled [1] to be released December 8th. Qt 5.6 beta will be released in a few days. What are your opinions on releasing LyX 2.2.0 alpha

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

Le 12/10/2015 12:45, Liviu Andronic a écrit : True. :) What is the current minimum Qt 5.x requirement? I do not think that there is any strong requirement. The problem is more in Qt5 bugs that this may expose. JMarc

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 12/10/2015 12:45, Liviu Andronic a écrit : >> >> True. :) What is the current minimum Qt 5.x requirement? > > > I do not think that there is any strong requirement. The problem is more in > Qt5 bugs that this

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

Op 12 okt. 2015 15:14 schreef "Liviu Andronic" : > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes > wrote: > > Le 12/10/2015 12:45, Liviu Andronic a écrit : > >> > >> True. :) What is the current minimum Qt 5.x requirement? > > > > > > I do not

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 12/10/2015 12:38, Liviu Andronic a écrit : So as far as Trusty users are concerned (likely a big chunk of the Ubuntu user base), if 2.2.0 depends on Qt 5.6 they will be locked into Qt 4.8 for the entire 2.2.x series. I don't know if the benefits of depending on

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 09:20:49AM +0900, Cyrille Artho wrote: > Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > >Le 12/10/2015 12:38, Liviu Andronic a écrit : > >>So as far as Trusty users are concerned (likely a big chunk of the > >>Ubuntu user base), if 2.2.0 depends on Qt 5.6 they will be locked into > >>Qt 4.8

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 01:39:50PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 12/10/2015 12:45, Liviu Andronic a écrit : > >True. :) What is the current minimum Qt 5.x requirement? > > I do not think that there is any strong requirement. The problem is more in > Qt5 bugs that this may expose. I

Re: When to court Qt 5.6?

Am 13.10.2015 um 02:56 schrieb Scott Kostyshak : > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 09:20:49AM +0900, Cyrille Artho wrote: >> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >>> Le 12/10/2015 12:38, Liviu Andronic a écrit : So as far as Trusty users are concerned (likely a big chunk of the Ubuntu