[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: kio/scheduler: Does not compile with Qt from 4.8 branch
From:       Jeremy Whiting <jpwhiting () kde ! org>
Date:       2011-04-29 18:50:53
Message-ID: BANLkTi=H94kM_4+9CzzktmFpFZG2FSCaUA () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Olivier Goffart <ogoffart@kde.org> wrote:

> Le Monday 25 April 2011, Michael Pyne a =E9crit :
> > On Sunday, April 24, 2011 16:42:22 Christoph Feck wrote:
> > > On Sunday 24 April 2011 15:04:38 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > > > Olivier, these are your moc changes.
> > >
> > > Given that Q_PRIVATE_SLOT is a private definition, shouldn't we rathe=
r
> > > fix the code in KDE?
> >
> > Perhaps, but let's let the developers making the changes verify that th=
is
> > was an intended side effect of the change. ;)
>
> Exactly, we rather be aware of breakage, so we can try not to break
> anything.
>
> In this case, we have to see if we can fix it in Qt. I do not see any
> solution
> on top of my head. We have to discuss if it is ok to break this use case =
if
> there is no solution.
> But it is true that this is use of private API, over which we do not
> support
> compatibility, so i think we may keep this change in Qt, and the change c=
an
> be
> fixed in KDE
>

Ok, Qt 4.8 has some accessibility fixes me and my gsoc student would like t=
o
use to further push the qt-atspi development.  Those involved with the
scheduler code how/when could this get fixed?

thanks,
Jeremy

[Attachment #3 (text/html)]

<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 4:54 PM, Olivier Goffart \
<span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:ogoffart@kde.org">ogoffart@kde.org</a>&gt;</span> \
wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px \
#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"> Le Monday 25 April 2011, Michael Pyne a écrit :<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5">&gt; On Sunday, April 24, 2011 16:42:22 Christoph \
Feck wrote:<br> &gt; &gt; On Sunday 24 April 2011 15:04:38 Thiago Macieira wrote:<br>
&gt; &gt; &gt; Olivier, these are your moc changes.<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; Given that Q_PRIVATE_SLOT is a private definition, shouldn&#39;t we \
rather<br> &gt; &gt; fix the code in KDE?<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Perhaps, but let&#39;s let the developers making the changes verify that \
this<br> &gt; was an intended side effect of the change. ;)<br>
<br>
</div></div>Exactly, we rather be aware of breakage, so we can try not to break \
anything.<br> <br>
In this case, we have to see if we can fix it in Qt. I do not see any solution<br>
on top of my head. We have to discuss if it is ok to break this use case if<br>
there is no solution.<br>
But it is true that this is use of private API, over which we do not support<br>
compatibility, so i think we may keep this change in Qt, and the change can be<br>
fixed in KDE<br></blockquote><div><br>Ok, Qt 4.8 has some accessibility fixes me and \
my gsoc student would like to use to further push the qt-atspi development.  Those \
involved with the scheduler code how/when could this get fixed?<br> \
<br>thanks,<br>Jeremy <br></div></div><br>



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]