QtScript considered dangerous

[Milian Wolff]

On Thursday 24 May 2012 12:57:14 David Faure wrote:
> On Thursday 24 May 2012 10:59:21 Dominik Haumann wrote:
> > they said they will probably not spent the considerable amount of time
> > in updating the archaic jsc checkout used in QtScript.
> 
> What about the solution of updating the JSC in QtScript, and submitting that
> on codereview.qt-project.org?
> 
> I.e. actually treating Qt like an opensource project and contributing the
> fix upstream?
> 
> The fact that no Qt developer will do it himself, doesn't mean they are
> opposed to it, if someone contributes the patch, does it?

Hey David,

of course that was my first take as well. I should have mentioned that. See my 
answer to Thomas Friedrichsmeier's email: The task of updating JSC is far from 
easy considering that an outsider would first need to grasp the custom changes 
done to the QtScript JSC checkout, then update JSC and rebase the old changes 
ontop of the new codebase. JSC has changed considerably in many places so this 
is a lot of work to do, it seems...

Bye

-- 
Milian Wolff
mail at milianw.de
http://milianw.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20120526/8c45f1f7/attachment.sig>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
KWrite-Devel mailing list
KWrite-Devel at kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kwrite-devel