Qt.io webservices

The idea is to have it organized in repositories. The graphical tool qt-pods (there will be a command line version in the future) loads a list from your defined sources, then offers packages for install. You just click on them and they install to your projects. The same way you remove them. What happens is that they get added as git submodules and are woven together via a single .pri that is the single thing you need to include to you project. Then you can start using them! It's very easy, but it needs more people to come together, reformat the code and spread the word.

A shame they don't follow the company's evolution ;)

Wow, Thank you for the effort :)

[quote author="sierdzio" date="1421839346"]A bug report is here: "link":https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTWEBSITE-618.[/quote] Thanks for filing the bug report

OK, I'll keep that in mind. thanks.

Hi and welcome to devnet, Unless I'm mistaken, the 0xff here is to tell that you are storing only a RGB value in a 32bit container so the Alpha channel is always at 0xff

That was an attempt to hinder the rant-runs we've been seeing a lot lately, but it had some unforseen side-effects (the editing part). It has been lifted again. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yes, I did. The QtDeclarative modules was built but the its folder was not present on qtbase/lib/cmake/ there should be a folder there named Qt5Declarative containing a file named Qt5DeclarativeConfig.cmake, also I did not see any errors afer the build process finish.

No need for the contact form this time. I'm taking care of this. Most people are out for new year, so don't expect anything to show up before next week. If you really urgently need the logo, please mail me. Tero

Probably not. The videos people had were uploaded to YouTube. There are still pages like the one you found on the site. This should also be cleaned once things move to qt.io

It's the www. part in the beginning. Without that everything is good.

You had been marked as a spambot by the system. I just re-enabled the account.

Feature request ? ;)

Hi, It's a known typo made to stop a spamming onslaught that happened a few months ago

Probably the best would be to have some grace time until posts of new accounts will trigger notifications. A days or so seem to be plenty, when those accounts are removed quickly by moderators anyhow. I am wondering already for some time why this is not being implemented. Probably is the implementation not as easy as being the suggestion. Certainly the grace period requires to be triggered by the first post not the sign-up date, which will make the implementation even harder. Otherwise it would be too easy to get around.