Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Backport changes in v5.0.x branch #21698

Open
wants to merge 12 commits into
base: v5_0_x
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

@glassez glassez added this to the 5.0.2 milestone Oct 30, 2024
Obtain current date time of Qt and libtorrent clocks only once
for processing entire current libtorrent alerts bunch.

PR qbittorrent#21764.
There may be quite a few endpoint names (one for each available network card), and they usually remain unchanged throughout the session, while previously producing such names was performed every time they were accessed. Now they are retrieved from the cache.

PR qbittorrent#21770.
`QStyleHints::colorScheme()` returns chosen color scheme even if current style doesn't support it and uses different palette.

PR qbittorrent#21771.
@glassez
Copy link
Member Author

glassez commented Nov 8, 2024

@qbittorrent/bug-handlers
Does anyone understand what's wrong with Windows CI?

@xavier2k6
Copy link
Member

xavier2k6 commented Nov 8, 2024

Does anyone understand what's wrong with Windows CI?

upstream action problem, nothing related to any of these backports.

it seems to be a conflict between 3rd party actions (aqtinstall & install-qt) due to the msvc_2019/msvc_2022 defaults for Qt 6.7.3/Qt 6.8+

@xavier2k6
Copy link
Member

Windows CI, should be ok now. (fix & release has been made upstream)

@glassez glassez requested a review from a team November 12, 2024 13:59
@xavier2k6
Copy link
Member

@Chocobo1 Is #21643 eligible for backport for 5.0.2 release?

What about below?
#21407
#21213

@glassez
Copy link
Member Author

glassez commented Nov 12, 2024

What about below?
#21407
#21213

They don't fix any user faced bugs so there is no point in backported them.

@glassez
Copy link
Member Author

glassez commented Nov 12, 2024

What about below?
#21407
#21213

They don't fix any user faced bugs so there is no point in backported them.

The same is about #21643, no?

@xavier2k6
Copy link
Member

They don't fix any user faced bugs so there is no point in backported them.

No bother.

The same is about #21643, no?

Disregard...

xavier2k6
xavier2k6 previously approved these changes Nov 12, 2024
@Chocobo1
Copy link
Member

@Chocobo1 Is #21643 eligible for backport for 5.0.2 release?

I'm OK with backporting it. Python releases sometimes fix some security bugs so it might be worth to bump it.

@glassez
Copy link
Member Author

glassez commented Nov 14, 2024

Python releases sometimes fix some security bugs so it might be worth to bump it.

Python is not our concern (if it is compatible). If the user is not worried about its security bugs, we shouldn't be so intrusive (at least not in the interim releases).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants