On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 2:49 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > We are now done with new feature development and changes to our API. I > will merge the api_changes branch that contains the remaining changes to > our api back to master by the end of this week, and close the branch after > that.
I wonder: you imply that breaking binary compatibility "in a controlled way" (by controlling when we stage) is fine - but then why not keep the branch open for exactly that, and have those controlled merges 1-2 times a week, and not impede staging? People who need compile stability can use master (and rebuild once a week), people who don't mind rebuilding every pull can stick with api_changes, I mean. I was actually initially a bit sceptical, but I don't think it's worked all that badly as a model, aside from the extended period without a merge due to the alpha... _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
