Update: pull in upstream changes #6
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Compile fix for README example
…. Possible incompatibility with older releases!
…y() or controller->setReadonly() Update CMakeList.txt
… endChanges, to prevent updating per item)
Support for sticky-selection in replaceSelection methods. (Required for InpuMethod entry) Improved TextEditorComponent::InputMethodEvent... It now support special chars entry like expected. (Option+e, e => ´ => é) - Fixed gapvector destructor: it did not use an array delete. - TextEditorWidget::setHorizontalScrollBar not emits the correct horizontalScrollBarChanged event.
…. Possible incompatibility with older releases!
…y() or controller->setReadonly() Update CMakeList.txt
… endChanges, to prevent updating per item)
Support for sticky-selection in replaceSelection methods. (Required for InpuMethod entry) Improved TextEditorComponent::InputMethodEvent... It now support special chars entry like expected. (Option+e, e => ´ => é) - Fixed gapvector destructor: it did not use an array delete. - TextEditorWidget::setHorizontalScrollBar not emits the correct horizontalScrollBarChanged event.
SlySven
changed the title
|
The CI stuff is completely borked at present - it is still using the Ubutu Trusty distribution and is using Qt 5.6 ... it needs an update IMHO as that part was last revised in 2017... ... FTR it is our CI stuff BTW, upstream does not seem to make use of it. This is intended to be used for the replacement for Mudlet/Mudlet#4198 . |
|
Hm, but we don't want to be able to tell others that they can use either - they need to use what we use. |
vadi2
approved these changes
Oct 27, 2020
|
Hm, on second thought, why cherrypick all commits? Right now we don't have any specific changes, we merged everything into upstream - this means that we can just fast-forward the branch:
|
|
Closing in favour of #7 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR cherry-picks all the commits made upstream and then merges in that upstream with the result that they have identical code. {Edit: that may not have been the optimum as it seems that each non-merge commit appears twice!}
It should be possible to consider switching to the upstream repository which would make some third parties (packagers) happy as they could consider dropping our fork and using upstream for their builds. OTOH if upstream make changes that we are not happy with (or we want to make changes that upstream don't want) then keeping a parallel repository makes sense - however we really must keep ours in step with upstream if we want to tell third parties "you can use either"...