@SGaist Thank you for taking the time. Now, I am happy that I've more or less applied the architecture and workflow suggested by the man himself already. The example you used toward the end is exactly my case, which leads me to ask for tips here.
I will be checking the source tree for more specific cases and will be making modifications accordingly.
How about Squish? It's also used for release test automation of Qt.
Thank you for the suggestion! Yes we noticed Squish. But now we develop an application prototype using QML and until some milestone would like not to use commercial tools. On the other hand we don't need a thorough test coverage yet. We'd like mostly sanity tests to validate. And we want to try Qt test frameworks or implement feeding navigation commands and verification ourselves with Qt C++/QML means.
Ah, yes. From Qt4 you get:
# define Q_SIGNALS protected
I firmly believe that this change was made to accommodate the new way of connecting signals. I don't find it to be a great improvement, but this is a personal opinion ... In the new framework it seems every object can easily rise another object's signal, which is a bit ... hm ... suspicious ... not that it was impossible before, but you had to go the extra mile, by using the QMetaObject class.