[Development] Qt 5.10 pre-built binaries

Thu Jun 8 07:37:09 CEST 2017

Hello,
Would you also consider creating a smaller macOS offline installer? Current
version with Android and iOS is at 3.5 Gb and has been reported to cause
persistent timeouts when downloaded on CI like Travis.
Is providing android and iOS as add-on installs an option?

Marco Piccolino

Il 07 giu 2017 9:30 AM, <development-request at qt-project.org> ha scritto:

Send Development mailing list submissions to
        development at qt-project.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        development-request at qt-project.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
        development-owner at qt-project.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Development digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Future of Qt on Web? (Konstantin Tokarev)
   2. Re: Future of Qt on Web? (Lorn Potter)
   3. Re: Future of Qt on Web? (Jason H)
   4. Re: Nominating Vikas Pachdha for Approver status (Alex Blasche)
   5. Qt 5.10 pre-built bunaries (Jani Heikkinen)
   6. Re: Qt 5.10 pre-built bunaries (Lars Knoll)

---------- Messaggio inoltrato ----------
From: Konstantin Tokarev <annulen at yandex.ru>
To: Jason H <jhihn at gmx.com>, Lorn Potter <lorn.potter at gmail.com>
Cc: "development at qt-project.org" <development at qt-project.org>
Bcc:
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2017 17:22:26 +0300
Subject: Re: [Development] Future of Qt on Web?

05.06.2017, 17:20, "Jason H" <jhihn at gmx.com>:
>>  Sent: Monday, June 05, 2017 at 12:34 AM
>>  From: "Lorn Potter" <lorn.potter at gmail.com>
>>  To: development at qt-project.org
>>  Subject: Re: [Development] Future of Qt on Web?
>>
>>  On 06/05/2017 07:00 AM, Jason H wrote:
>>  > While Qt is not a web framework, over time there have been efforts to
use it on the web (outlined below).
>>  >
>>  > Given that Chrome is dropping NaCL (http://www.tomshardware.com/n
ews/chrome-deprecates-pnacl-embraces-webassembly,34583.html) and the WebGL
streaming is also not ideal (but better?), I am wondering about the future
of Qt on Web? Will there be a WebAssembly version of Qt?
>>
>>  We have been working on Qt5 for webassembly.
>>  I was just writing a short blog about this:
>>
>>  http://qtandeverything.blogspot.com.au/2017/06/qt-for-web-assembly.html
>
> That is great news! You mention the wasm is smaller? How much smaller?

This article says it's smaller than asm.js, not NaCl

> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

--
Regards,
Konstantin

---------- Messaggio inoltrato ----------
From: Lorn Potter <lorn.potter at gmail.com>
To: Jason H <jhihn at gmx.com>
Cc: development at qt-project.org
Bcc:
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 05:26:53 +1000
Subject: Re: [Development] Future of Qt on Web?

On 06/06/2017 12:20 AM, Jason H wrote:
>
>
>> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2017 at 12:34 AM
>> From: "Lorn Potter" <lorn.potter at gmail.com>
>> To: development at qt-project.org
>> Subject: Re: [Development] Future of Qt on Web?
>>
>>
>>
>> On 06/05/2017 07:00 AM, Jason H wrote:
>>> While Qt is not a web framework, over time there have been efforts to
use it on the web (outlined below).
>>>
>>> Given that Chrome is dropping NaCL (http://www.tomshardware.com/n
ews/chrome-deprecates-pnacl-embraces-webassembly,34583.html) and the WebGL
streaming is also not ideal (but better?), I am wondering about the future
of Qt on Web? Will there be a WebAssembly version of Qt?
>>
>> We have been working on Qt5 for webassembly.
>> I was just writing a short blog about this:
>>
>> http://qtandeverything.blogspot.com.au/2017/06/qt-for-web-assembly.html
>
> That is great news! You mention the wasm is smaller? How much smaller?

For one small example app (standarddialog) the difference between asmjs
and wasm is:

wasm: 520 k js file and 14 MB wasm file.
asmjs: 69 MB js file.

---------- Messaggio inoltrato ----------
From: Jason H <jhihn at gmx.com>
To: Lorn Potter <lorn.potter at gmail.com>
Cc: development at qt-project.org
Bcc:
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 21:51:53 +0200
Subject: Re: [Development] Future of Qt on Web?

> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2017 at 3:26 PM
> From: "Lorn Potter" <lorn.potter at gmail.com>
> To: "Jason H" <jhihn at gmx.com>
> Cc: development at qt-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Development] Future of Qt on Web?
>
>
>
> On 06/06/2017 12:20 AM, Jason H wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Sent: Monday, June 05, 2017 at 12:34 AM
> >> From: "Lorn Potter" <lorn.potter at gmail.com>
> >> To: development at qt-project.org
> >> Subject: Re: [Development] Future of Qt on Web?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 06/05/2017 07:00 AM, Jason H wrote:
> >>> While Qt is not a web framework, over time there have been efforts to
use it on the web (outlined below).
> >>>
> >>> Given that Chrome is dropping NaCL (http://www.tomshardware.com/n
ews/chrome-deprecates-pnacl-embraces-webassembly,34583.html) and the WebGL
streaming is also not ideal (but better?), I am wondering about the future
of Qt on Web? Will there be a WebAssembly version of Qt?
> >>
> >> We have been working on Qt5 for webassembly.
> >> I was just writing a short blog about this:
> >>
> >> http://qtandeverything.blogspot.com.au/2017/06/qt-for-web-assembly.html
> >
> > That is great news! You mention the wasm is smaller? How much smaller?
>
> For one small example app (standarddialog) the difference between asmjs
> and wasm is:
>
> wasm: 520 k js file and 14 MB wasm file.
> asmjs: 69 MB js file.

That's encouraging. It's almost reasonable. Maybe a progressive web app
would be the way to go?
But I don't think that is using the browser in the best way? You're
effectively telling it how to redraw everything, rather than letting it do
what it already knows how to do. Is that a fair statement?

---------- Messaggio inoltrato ----------
From: Alex Blasche <alexander.blasche at qt.io>
To: "<development at qt-project.org>" <development at qt-project.org>
Cc: qt-creator <qt-creator at qt-project.org>
Bcc:
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 11:58:08 +0000
Subject: Re: [Development] Nominating Vikas Pachdha for Approver status
Congratulations to Vikas. The rights have been adjusted.

--
Alex
________________________________________
From: Development <development-bounces+alexander.blasche=
qt.io at qt-project.org> on behalf of Eike Ziller <Eike.Ziller at qt.io>
Sent: Monday, 15 May 2017 10:43:57 AM
To: <development at qt-project.org>
Cc: qt-creator
Subject: [Development] Nominating Vikas Pachdha for Approver status

Hereby I nominate Vikas Pachdha for Approver status. He has been defacto
maintaining iOS support in Qt Creator since a year.

https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/q/owner:%22Vikas+Pachdha
%22+status:merged,n,z

Br,
--
Eike Ziller
Principal Software Engineer

The Qt Company GmbH
Rudower Chaussee 13
D-12489 Berlin
eike.ziller at qt.io
http://qt.io
Geschäftsführer: Mika Pälsi,
Juha Varelius, Mika Harjuaho
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg,
HRB 144331 B

_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
Development at qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

---------- Messaggio inoltrato ----------
From: Jani Heikkinen <jani.heikkinen at qt.io>
To: "development at qt-project.org" <development at qt-project.org>
Cc: "releasing at qt-project.org" <releasing at qt-project.org>
Bcc:
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 06:57:10 +0000
Subject: [Development] Qt 5.10 pre-built bunaries
Hi all,

There has been discussion ongoing about 5.10 supported platforms and CI
configurations. What we haven't agreed yet is Qt 5.10 pre-built binaries. I
don't see big need to change anything from 5.9 but there is still couple of
things on my mind:

- Should we now switch from MinGW32 bit -> MinGW 64bit ones? With 5.9 this
was too early but would it be time to do it now? Offering both isn't an
option. And 5,9 is LTS so 5.10 could be good release to change that...

- Can we start using RHEL 7.4 for linux packaging? Tony is planning to add
RHEL 7.4 in CI and so on it would be wise to replace 7.2 with 7.4 in the
packaging as well

Is there some other change proposals which we should discuss about?

br,
Jani

---------- Messaggio inoltrato ----------
From: Lars Knoll <lars.knoll at qt.io>
To: Jani Heikkinen <jani.heikkinen at qt.io>
Cc: Qt development mailing list <development at qt-project.org>, "
releasing at qt-project.org" <releasing at qt-project.org>
Bcc:
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2017 07:30:15 +0000
Subject: Re: [Development] Qt 5.10 pre-built bunaries
Hi Jani,

> On 7 Jun 2017, at 08:57, Jani Heikkinen <jani.heikkinen at qt.io> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> There has been discussion ongoing about 5.10 supported platforms and CI
configurations. What we haven't agreed yet is Qt 5.10 pre-built binaries. I
don't see big need to change anything from 5.9 but there is still couple of
things on my mind:
>
> - Should we now switch from MinGW32 bit -> MinGW 64bit ones? With 5.9
this was too early but would it be time to do it now? Offering both isn't
an option. And 5,9 is LTS so 5.10 could be good release to change that...

We got a lot of questions about 32bit binaries still in the comments to the
release blog. But those were pretty much all about VS2017. I'd personally
be happy to move more towards 64 bit, but we should somehow find out how
much 32bit is still required by our users.
>
> - Can we start using RHEL 7.4 for linux packaging? Tony is planning to
add RHEL 7.4 in CI and so on it would be wise to replace 7.2 with 7.4 in
the packaging as well

Sounds good to me, unless anybody knows about any reasons why we should
stay on 7.2.
>
> Is there some other change proposals which we should discuss about?

I think we should strongly consider dropping 32bit for iOS.

Cheers,
Lars

_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
Development at qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20170608/9bf86ce6/attachment.html>