[Development] Two bugs in the QIcon which broke my life.

[Mark]

On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:43 PM,  <marius.storm-olsen at nokia.com> wrote:
> On 08/08/2012 04:12, ext André Somers wrote:
>> Op 8-8-2012 10:49, Stephen Kelly schreef:
>>> On Wednesday, August 08, 2012 10:35:15 André Somers wrote:
>>> > Op 8-8-2012 10:30, Stephen Kelly schreef:
>>> > > On Wednesday, August 08, 2012 12:03:34 ????????? ??????? wrote:
>>> > > > In the QIcon/QIconLoader there are 2 old bugs with patches.
>>> > > > - https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-17953
>>> > > > - https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-12874
>>> > > > Fixes are trivial, and are available for many years. Merging of them
>>> > > > will take only an hour.
>>> > > You need to submit patches to Qt through gerrit. Patches attached in
>>> > > JIRA can't be applied. Note also that patches have to be applied to Qt
>>> > > 5 first and unit tested.
>>> >
>>> > Nice, but these patches were submitted way before Gerrit was available.
>>> > Are you saying we should just disgard any fixes that can be found in
>>> JIRA?
>>>
>>> They are not covered by the CLA.
>>>
>> Are you sure about that?
>
> Yes, Stephen is correct, the CLA covers only patches which has been
> submitted through Codereview.qt-project.org, so patches in
> Jira/Wiki/email cannot be applied.
>
> Even if the author "gives" you copyright to submit it to codereview as
> yourself (which is not allowed in many countries), _you_ would then be
> personally responsible for granting the license to use any patents
> his/her code might be infringing on. So, *don't* do that. Only submit
> code you have written yourself and where you can stand by the
> implementation.
>
>
>>> Whether they are 'trivial' enough to 'not be copyrightable' isn't
>>> for me to decide. I didn't look at them.
>>>
>>> Even when gerrit was not available, gitorious was available for all
>>>  the time that JIRA was available. JIRA has never been 'the way to
>>>  submit patches'.
>>
>> One of these had a MR on gitorious, actually. That got closed some
>> time later because Gerrit got introduced in the meantime. So, I bet
>> the contributor signed the agreement. I guess the submitter did not
>> want to jump through the hoops again, in the hope that this time his
>> patch *would* get accepted.
>
> A codereview can be done without using Gerrit of course, through email,
> IRC or any other means which reaches the author. However, the CLA has
> changed in several points since the Gitorious MR days (to the better,
> after discussions with multiple parties active on codereview today).
> This means that the old patches which were stuck or hadn't passed
> through the Gitorious MR system before we switched will need to be
> submitted again under the new terms.
>
> Frankly, the hurdle for doing so is not big, and if you have agreed to
> the terms before, I'm sure the new term as just as good as the previous
> ones.
>
> To reiterate what Stephen said, please submit patches through
> http://codereview.qt-project.org, it's the only way we can properly
> apply them.
>
> --
> .marius
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

As for the second bug report
(https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-12874) shouldn't the
standard icon paths be defined in the new class QStandardPaths? Then
QIcon can use QStandardPaths to find icons - obviously.

Right now i don't see any icon related thing in
http://doc-snapshot.qt-project.org/5.0/qstandardpaths.html Since the
icon stuff is defined by freedesktop
(http://standards.freedesktop.org/icon-theme-spec/icon-theme-spec-latest.html#directory_layout)
it might as well be added in there.

Adding David Faure to the cc since he invented QStandardPaths.