> I actually prefer Loaden's suggestion, Ok for me.
> Yeah, right... We've been feature-complete for a while. So why is Qt 5.0.0 not > released yet? [skip] Yes, I am sorry for that. I did not get your point initially, but I understand your point now (see my other email). > We cannot design an idiot-proof system. I'm not calling our contributors > idiots: in fact, quite to the contrary, I'm calling our contributors > reasonable and intelligent people, who will realise that there are more > branches they could look at. [skip] Yes, I agree about that any approach should be well-documented and reviewed. Laszlo _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
