[meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

Martin, Otavio, et al,

Are you planning on updating Qt version in master to 5.1.1 any time soon, 
preferably before 1.5 release? :) If nobody looked into that yet, will you be 
open to take patches for the same?

-- 
Denys

Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Eric Bénard]

Hi Denys,

Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:01:20 -0400,
Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :

> Martin, Otavio, et al,
> 
> Are you planning on updating Qt version in master to 5.1.1 any time soon, 
> preferably before 1.5 release? :) If nobody looked into that yet, will you be 
> open to take patches for the same?
> 
I have 5.1.1 in test here. I expect to send the patch in the coming
days.

Eric

Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:29:56PM +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
> Hi Denys,
> 
> Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:01:20 -0400,
> Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :
> 
> > Martin, Otavio, et al,
> > 
> > Are you planning on updating Qt version in master to 5.1.1 any time soon, 
> > preferably before 1.5 release? :) If nobody looked into that yet, will you be 
> > open to take patches for the same?
> > 
> I have 5.1.1 in test here. I expect to send the patch in the coming
> days.

Thanks! Sounds good. Let me know if you need help in testing!

-- 
Denys

Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Eric Bénard]

Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:37:39 -0400,
Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :

> On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:29:56PM +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
> > Hi Denys,
> > 
> > Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:01:20 -0400,
> > Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :
> > 
> > > Martin, Otavio, et al,
> > > 
> > > Are you planning on updating Qt version in master to 5.1.1 any time soon, 
> > > preferably before 1.5 release? :) If nobody looked into that yet, will you be 
> > > open to take patches for the same?
> > > 
> > I have 5.1.1 in test here. I expect to send the patch in the coming
> > days.
> 
> Thanks! Sounds good. Let me know if you need help in testing!
> 

as soon as it finish to compile here I'll send the patch serie for
testing.

Eric

Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Martin Jansa]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1309 bytes --]

On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:57:10PM +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
> Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:37:39 -0400,
> Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :
> 
> > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:29:56PM +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
> > > Hi Denys,
> > > 
> > > Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:01:20 -0400,
> > > Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :
> > > 
> > > > Martin, Otavio, et al,
> > > > 
> > > > Are you planning on updating Qt version in master to 5.1.1 any time soon, 
> > > > preferably before 1.5 release? :) If nobody looked into that yet, will you be 
> > > > open to take patches for the same?
> > > > 
> > > I have 5.1.1 in test here. I expect to send the patch in the coming
> > > days.
> > 
> > Thanks! Sounds good. Let me know if you need help in testing!
> > 
> 
> as soon as it finish to compile here I'll send the patch serie for
> testing.

+Laszlo

Laszlo also said that he is working on patches for 5.1.1 I don't know
how far he got..

I would be happy to merge patches from whoever finishes it first.

Would be great if you could send update for individual modules in 
https://github.com/meta-qt5 (especially qtbase where we have most
patches) but if you don't I'll do it myself from meta-qt5 patches.

-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]

Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:43:48PM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:57:10PM +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
> > > Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:37:39 -0400,
> > > Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:29:56PM +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
> > > > > Hi Denys,
> > > > >
> > > > > Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:01:20 -0400,
> > > > > Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > > Martin, Otavio, et al,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Are you planning on updating Qt version in master to 5.1.1 any
> > time soon,
> > > > > > preferably before 1.5 release? :) If nobody looked into that yet,
> > will you be
> > > > > > open to take patches for the same?
> > > > > >
> > > > > I have 5.1.1 in test here. I expect to send the patch in the coming
> > > > > days.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks! Sounds good. Let me know if you need help in testing!
> > > >
> > >
> > > as soon as it finish to compile here I'll send the patch serie for
> > > testing.
> >
> > +Laszlo
> >
> > Laszlo also said that he is working on patches for 5.1.1 I don't know
> > how far he got..
> >
> 
> Not any far, sorry, but I would be happy to use someone else's patches. By
> the way, it would be nice to have 5.2.0 alpha (and later beta) updates
> soon, too.

Having 5.2.0 alpha would be nice, but that's probably too unstable to try and 
get in before Dora release. I want 5.1.1 as the latest stable to get into 
Dora. :) So, I'm offering any help to expedite things like testing and such :)

-- 
Denys

Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Martin Jansa]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2163 bytes --]

On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 03:49:22PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:43:48PM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:57:10PM +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
> > > > Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:37:39 -0400,
> > > > Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:29:56PM +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Denys,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:01:20 -0400,
> > > > > > Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Martin, Otavio, et al,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Are you planning on updating Qt version in master to 5.1.1 any
> > > time soon,
> > > > > > > preferably before 1.5 release? :) If nobody looked into that yet,
> > > will you be
> > > > > > > open to take patches for the same?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > I have 5.1.1 in test here. I expect to send the patch in the coming
> > > > > > days.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks! Sounds good. Let me know if you need help in testing!
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > as soon as it finish to compile here I'll send the patch serie for
> > > > testing.
> > >
> > > +Laszlo
> > >
> > > Laszlo also said that he is working on patches for 5.1.1 I don't know
> > > how far he got..
> > >
> > 
> > Not any far, sorry, but I would be happy to use someone else's patches. By
> > the way, it would be nice to have 5.2.0 alpha (and later beta) updates
> > soon, too.
> 
> Having 5.2.0 alpha would be nice, but that's probably too unstable to try and 
> get in before Dora release. I want 5.1.1 as the latest stable to get into 
> Dora. :) So, I'm offering any help to expedite things like testing and such :)

I've already branched meta-qt5/dora before removing 5.0.2 recipes from
master.

I'm willing to "backport" 5.1.1 from master to dora or even remove 5.0.2
there as well, but last time I've asked around nobody responded to say
if they are still using 5.0.2 or 5.1.* is good enough for everybody.

-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]

Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 10:15:36PM +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 03:49:22PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:43:48PM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:57:10PM +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
> > > > > Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:37:39 -0400,
> > > > > Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:29:56PM +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi Denys,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:01:20 -0400,
> > > > > > > Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Martin, Otavio, et al,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Are you planning on updating Qt version in master to 5.1.1 any
> > > > time soon,
> > > > > > > > preferably before 1.5 release? :) If nobody looked into that yet,
> > > > will you be
> > > > > > > > open to take patches for the same?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have 5.1.1 in test here. I expect to send the patch in the coming
> > > > > > > days.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks! Sounds good. Let me know if you need help in testing!
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > as soon as it finish to compile here I'll send the patch serie for
> > > > > testing.
> > > >
> > > > +Laszlo
> > > >
> > > > Laszlo also said that he is working on patches for 5.1.1 I don't know
> > > > how far he got..
> > > >
> > > 
> > > Not any far, sorry, but I would be happy to use someone else's patches. By
> > > the way, it would be nice to have 5.2.0 alpha (and later beta) updates
> > > soon, too.
> > 
> > Having 5.2.0 alpha would be nice, but that's probably too unstable to try and 
> > get in before Dora release. I want 5.1.1 as the latest stable to get into 
> > Dora. :) So, I'm offering any help to expedite things like testing and such :)
> 
> I've already branched meta-qt5/dora before removing 5.0.2 recipes from
> master.
> 
> I'm willing to "backport" 5.1.1 from master to dora or even remove 5.0.2
> there as well, but last time I've asked around nobody responded to say
> if they are still using 5.0.2 or 5.1.* is good enough for everybody.

Sorry for not responding before, but for our needs 5.0.2 is not sufficient, 
5.1.x and specifically 5.1.1 is preferred. I would very appreciate backporting 
5.1.1 into Dora, once we get it tested and merged - hoping to see Eric's 
patches vert soon :)

-- 
Denys

Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 09:29:50PM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 10:15:36PM +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 03:49:22PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:43:48PM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:57:10PM +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
> > > > > > > Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:37:39 -0400,
> > > > > > > Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:29:56PM +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi Denys,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:01:20 -0400,
> > > > > > > > > Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Martin, Otavio, et al,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Are you planning on updating Qt version in master to 5.1.1
> > any
> > > > > > time soon,
> > > > > > > > > > preferably before 1.5 release? :) If nobody looked into
> > that yet,
> > > > > > will you be
> > > > > > > > > > open to take patches for the same?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I have 5.1.1 in test here. I expect to send the patch in the
> > coming
> > > > > > > > > days.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks! Sounds good. Let me know if you need help in testing!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > as soon as it finish to compile here I'll send the patch serie
> > for
> > > > > > > testing.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +Laszlo
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Laszlo also said that he is working on patches for 5.1.1 I don't
> > know
> > > > > > how far he got..
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Not any far, sorry, but I would be happy to use someone else's
> > patches. By
> > > > > the way, it would be nice to have 5.2.0 alpha (and later beta)
> > updates
> > > > > soon, too.
> > > >
> > > > Having 5.2.0 alpha would be nice, but that's probably too unstable to
> > try and
> > > > get in before Dora release. I want 5.1.1 as the latest stable to get
> > into
> > > > Dora. :) So, I'm offering any help to expedite things like testing and
> > such :)
> > >
> > > I've already branched meta-qt5/dora before removing 5.0.2 recipes from
> > > master.
> > >
> > > I'm willing to "backport" 5.1.1 from master to dora or even remove 5.0.2
> > > there as well, but last time I've asked around nobody responded to say
> > > if they are still using 5.0.2 or 5.1.* is good enough for everybody.
> >
> > Sorry for not responding before, but for our needs 5.0.2 is not sufficient,
> > 5.1.x and specifically 5.1.1 is preferred. I would very appreciate
> > backporting
> > 5.1.1 into Dora
> 
> Be careful with this. I assume you mean the dora branch as opposed to the
> Dora poky release.

Not to sound rude and I mean no offense to our Poky friends, but I don't care 
about Poky release here. I care about the Yocto Project unified tagging and 
branching strategy, so yes, Dora branch is what I meant. And besides, Poky 
release does not contain meta-qt5, as far as I know.

-- 
Denys

Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Trevor Woerner]

Would the intent here be to replace 5.1.0 with 5.1.1? Or to have both
versions available and let the user choose?

Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:57:18PM -0400, Trevor Woerner wrote:
> Would the intent here be to replace 5.1.0 with 5.1.1? Or to have both
> versions available and let the user choose?

5.1.1 is a minor patch-release in 5.1 series. There's no reason to keep both 
5.1.0 and 5.1.1...

-- 
Denys

Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Otavio Salvador]

On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 9:57 PM, Trevor Woerner
<trevor.woerner@linaro.org> wrote:
> Would the intent here be to replace 5.1.0 with 5.1.1? Or to have both
> versions available and let the user choose?

I'd prefer drop 5.1.0 and move to 5.1.1

-- 
Otavio Salvador                             O.S. Systems
http://www.ossystems.com.br        http://code.ossystems.com.br
Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854            Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750

Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 08:15:53AM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 9:35 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 09:29:50PM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 10:15:36PM +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 03:49:22PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:43:48PM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Martin Jansa <
> > martin.jansa@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:57:10PM +0200, Eric Bénard wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:37:39 -0400,
> > > > > > > > > Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:29:56PM +0200, Eric Bénard
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi Denys,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:01:20 -0400,
> > > > > > > > > > > Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Martin, Otavio, et al,
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Are you planning on updating Qt version in master to
> > 5.1.1
> > > > any
> > > > > > > > time soon,
> > > > > > > > > > > > preferably before 1.5 release? :) If nobody looked into
> > > > that yet,
> > > > > > > > will you be
> > > > > > > > > > > > open to take patches for the same?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I have 5.1.1 in test here. I expect to send the patch in
> > the
> > > > coming
> > > > > > > > > > > days.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks! Sounds good. Let me know if you need help in
> > testing!
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > as soon as it finish to compile here I'll send the patch
> > serie
> > > > for
> > > > > > > > > testing.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > +Laszlo
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Laszlo also said that he is working on patches for 5.1.1 I
> > don't
> > > > know
> > > > > > > > how far he got..
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Not any far, sorry, but I would be happy to use someone else's
> > > > patches. By
> > > > > > > the way, it would be nice to have 5.2.0 alpha (and later beta)
> > > > updates
> > > > > > > soon, too.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Having 5.2.0 alpha would be nice, but that's probably too unstable
> > to
> > > > try and
> > > > > > get in before Dora release. I want 5.1.1 as the latest stable to
> > get
> > > > into
> > > > > > Dora. :) So, I'm offering any help to expedite things like testing
> > and
> > > > such :)
> > > > >
> > > > > I've already branched meta-qt5/dora before removing 5.0.2 recipes
> > from
> > > > > master.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm willing to "backport" 5.1.1 from master to dora or even remove
> > 5.0.2
> > > > > there as well, but last time I've asked around nobody responded to
> > say
> > > > > if they are still using 5.0.2 or 5.1.* is good enough for everybody.
> > > >
> > > > Sorry for not responding before, but for our needs 5.0.2 is not
> > sufficient,
> > > > 5.1.x and specifically 5.1.1 is preferred. I would very appreciate
> > > > backporting
> > > > 5.1.1 into Dora
> > >
> > > Be careful with this. I assume you mean the dora branch as opposed to the
> > > Dora poky release.
> >
> > And besides, Poky release does not contain meta-qt5, as far as I know.
> >
> 
> That was my point, yes. Your email reads like as if they were strictly tied
> together, or maybe even integrated. While, you can freely use post-dora
> meta-qt5 version with Dora, too. As I wrote, they are orthogonal.

Just knowing what mailing list this is would clear all your doubts right away.

-- 
Denys

Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 02:23:13PM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 08:15:53AM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 9:35 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 09:29:50PM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 10:15:36PM +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
> > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 03:49:22PM -0400, Denys Dmytriyenko
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:43:48PM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Martin Jansa <
> > > > martin.jansa@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:57:10PM +0200, Eric Bénard
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:37:39 -0400,
> > > > > > > > > > > Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 08:29:56PM +0200, Eric Bénard
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Denys,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Le Mon, 07 Oct 2013 14:01:20 -0400,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> a écrit :
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Martin, Otavio, et al,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Are you planning on updating Qt version in master
> > to
> > > > 5.1.1
> > > > > > any
> > > > > > > > > > time soon,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > preferably before 1.5 release? :) If nobody looked
> > into
> > > > > > that yet,
> > > > > > > > > > will you be
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > open to take patches for the same?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I have 5.1.1 in test here. I expect to send the
> > patch in
> > > > the
> > > > > > coming
> > > > > > > > > > > > > days.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! Sounds good. Let me know if you need help in
> > > > testing!
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > as soon as it finish to compile here I'll send the patch
> > > > serie
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > testing.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > +Laszlo
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Laszlo also said that he is working on patches for 5.1.1 I
> > > > don't
> > > > > > know
> > > > > > > > > > how far he got..
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Not any far, sorry, but I would be happy to use someone
> > else's
> > > > > > patches. By
> > > > > > > > > the way, it would be nice to have 5.2.0 alpha (and later
> > beta)
> > > > > > updates
> > > > > > > > > soon, too.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Having 5.2.0 alpha would be nice, but that's probably too
> > unstable
> > > > to
> > > > > > try and
> > > > > > > > get in before Dora release. I want 5.1.1 as the latest stable
> > to
> > > > get
> > > > > > into
> > > > > > > > Dora. :) So, I'm offering any help to expedite things like
> > testing
> > > > and
> > > > > > such :)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I've already branched meta-qt5/dora before removing 5.0.2 recipes
> > > > from
> > > > > > > master.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm willing to "backport" 5.1.1 from master to dora or even
> > remove
> > > > 5.0.2
> > > > > > > there as well, but last time I've asked around nobody responded
> > to
> > > > say
> > > > > > > if they are still using 5.0.2 or 5.1.* is good enough for
> > everybody.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sorry for not responding before, but for our needs 5.0.2 is not
> > > > sufficient,
> > > > > > 5.1.x and specifically 5.1.1 is preferred. I would very appreciate
> > > > > > backporting
> > > > > > 5.1.1 into Dora
> > > > >
> > > > > Be careful with this. I assume you mean the dora branch as opposed
> > to the
> > > > > Dora poky release.
> > > >
> > > > And besides, Poky release does not contain meta-qt5, as far as I know.
> > > >
> > >
> > > That was my point, yes. Your email reads like as if they were strictly
> > tied
> > > together, or maybe even integrated. While, you can freely use post-dora
> > > meta-qt5 version with Dora, too. As I wrote, they are orthogonal.
> >
> > Just knowing what mailing list this is would clear all your doubts right
> > away.
> 
> 
> As you can see, it has not. So, please be clear in the future. :) meta-qt5
> is orthogonal to Dora as far as it is not integrated.

Since Dora is a branch of meta-qt5, I don't understand your statements about 
being orthogonal and not integrated...

-- 
Denys

Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Martin Jansa]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1478 bytes --]

On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 02:30:05PM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> wrote:
> > Since Dora is a branch of meta-qt5, I don't understand your statements
> > about
> > being orthogonal and not integrated...
> >
> 
> You will be able to use *any* meta-qt5 on top of Dora, just as you can use
> meta-qt5 on top of denzil nowadays. The "dora branching" sounds like red
> herring to me. The dependencies in Dora will be good enough for 1-2 years,
> if not much more.

That's not true, we were just lucky that there weren't any incompatible
changes in oe-core, but as soon as 1.6. brings e.g. new cmake, master
branch will work only with master and dora only with dora (because of
.bbappend).

So the same branch names are the only supported combination, if you want
to use meta-qt5/master with oe-core/dylan then you're on your own. It
works now, but only because we're lucky.

> 5.2 comes with several fundamental improvements. I would not personally
> recommend Qt 5.1 to anyone in about two months time when the release can
> happen. :)

There are companies still using 5.0.0 just because they fear to upgrade
or because newer qt versions were released to late for their release
cycle of real hw products. I agree that it would be nice for everybody
to just use latest, but there are still meta-qt5 users which cannot do
that.

-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]

Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Martin Jansa]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3158 bytes --]

On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 02:50:59PM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 02:30:05PM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > Since Dora is a branch of meta-qt5, I don't understand your statements
> > > > about
> > > > being orthogonal and not integrated...
> > > >
> > >
> > > You will be able to use *any* meta-qt5 on top of Dora, just as you can
> > use
> > > meta-qt5 on top of denzil nowadays. The "dora branching" sounds like red
> > > herring to me. The dependencies in Dora will be good enough for 1-2
> > years,
> > > if not much more.
> >
> > That's not true, we were just lucky that there weren't any incompatible
> > changes in oe-core, but as soon as 1.6. brings e.g. new cmake, master
> > branch will work only with master and dora only with dora (because of
> > .bbappend).
> >
> 
> I am not sure who it is not true. Qt has been working for me, and even if
> there are small quirks, they community can and will provide changes. Even
> if they could not, they can use .bbappend, and custom changes for any
> recipes. That is the strength of open embedded after all. It is very
> unlikely that everyone will always like every package.

That's basically what I said, if they use unsupported combination, they
can expect that they will maybe need to resolve some quirks on their
own.

>  So the same branch names are the only supported combination, if you want
> 
> > to use meta-qt5/master with oe-core/dylan then you're on your own. It
> > works now, but only because we're lucky.
> >
> 
> IMO, this is unreasonable. It will cause additional overhead and looking at
> the manpower behind this layer, I am not really sure it is worth it.
> Quality should be over quantity. Maintaining several branches rather than
> just having one and well-qualified branch for starter would be more
> fruitful in my opinion.

Everything goes to master first, bugfixes can go also to release
branches which track older oe-core releases, the same rules which apply
to meta-oe and other layers apply here.

> > > 5.2 comes with several fundamental improvements. I would not personally
> > > recommend Qt 5.1 to anyone in about two months time when the release can
> > > happen. :)
> >
> > There are companies still using 5.0.0 just because they fear to upgrade
> > or because newer qt versions were released to late for their release
> > cycle of real hw products. I agree that it would be nice for everybody
> > to just use latest, but there are still meta-qt5 users which cannot do
> > that.
> >
> 
> So what? They can always use bbappend, own packages, old branches, etc.
> That should be in no way obstacle for new innovation.

Yes, that's why meta-qt5 will exist in "old branch" for each oe-core
release and such branches will get only bug fixes, because people who
cannot upgrade oe-core to latest probably don't want to upgrade qt5 to
latest as well.

-- 
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa     jabber: Martin.Jansa@gmail.com

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 205 bytes --]

Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Denys Dmytriyenko]

On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 03:39:18PM +0200, Martin Jansa wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 02:30:05PM +0100, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Denys Dmytriyenko <denis@denix.org> wrote:
> > > Since Dora is a branch of meta-qt5, I don't understand your statements
> > > about
> > > being orthogonal and not integrated...
> > >
> > 
> > You will be able to use *any* meta-qt5 on top of Dora, just as you can use
> > meta-qt5 on top of denzil nowadays. The "dora branching" sounds like red
> > herring to me. The dependencies in Dora will be good enough for 1-2 years,
> > if not much more.
> 
> That's not true, we were just lucky that there weren't any incompatible
> changes in oe-core, but as soon as 1.6. brings e.g. new cmake, master
> branch will work only with master and dora only with dora (because of
> .bbappend).
> 
> So the same branch names are the only supported combination, if you want
> to use meta-qt5/master with oe-core/dylan then you're on your own. It
> works now, but only because we're lucky.

Yep, well said!

-- 
Denys

Re: [meta-qt5] Update to 5.1.1?

[Trevor Woerner]

On 8 October 2013 09:39, Martin Jansa <martin.jansa@gmail.com> wrote:
> So the same branch names are the only supported combination, if you want
> to use meta-qt5/master with oe-core/dylan then you're on your own. It
> works now, but only because we're lucky.

I have been experimenting with using meta-qt5's master with oe-core's
dylan and have noticed the following:

1) master now has a nice PACKAGECONFIG, so if you were setting/using
any configuration settings you'll need to update your .bbappend (or
whatever) to use the new facility

2) if all you want is qtbase then this doesn't apply; but if you want
other qt components you'll need to explicitly enable ICU in qtbase
(this wasn't required in dylan)

3) if you want to enable support for DirectFB you'll find that the
version of DirectFB in oe-core's dylan branch isn't high enough

But other than that, yes it works.