On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 11:15:08PM +0300, Guy Rutenberg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 18 July 2013 02:17, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> >
> > The usual way is that you send patches to the list and if there is agreement
> > they are fine someone commits for you.
>
>
> I trying to describe my proposed changes befo
On 07/18/2013 04:15 PM, Guy Rutenberg wrote:
Hi,
On 18 July 2013 02:17, Pavel Sanda wrote:
The usual way is that you send patches to the list and if there is agreement
they are fine someone commits for you.
I trying to describe my proposed changes before actually writing them, as that
woul
Hi,
On 18 July 2013 02:17, Pavel Sanda wrote:
>
> The usual way is that you send patches to the list and if there is agreement
> they are fine someone commits for you.
I trying to describe my proposed changes before actually writing them,
as that would take much longer. If there is an agreement
Guy Rutenberg wrote:
> On 6 July 2013 15:04, Stephan Witt wrote:
>
> > IMHO, the current state is a result of using system() call at first
> > because of platform independency and it is never moved to the execv()
> > style later because using QProcess is an option only.
> >
>
> Now that I'm more
Hi,
On 6 July 2013 15:04, Stephan Witt wrote:
> IMHO, the current state is a result of using system() call at first
> because of platform independency and it is never moved to the execv()
> style later because using QProcess is an option only.
>
Now that I'm more familiar with that code, I thin
Am 06.07.2013 um 11:52 schrieb Guy Rutenberg :
> Hi,
>
> I'm going over the code of Systemcall::startscript() and I wonder why the
> developers opted out to pass spaces separated arguments instead of a list of
> arguments (e.g. system() vs execv() argument passing)?
>
> QProcess seems to suppo
