> From: Oleg Shparber <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > Date: perjantaina 5. lokakuuta 2012 11.57 > To: Tuukka Turunen <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > Cc: Rafael Roquetto > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, > "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, > "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> > Subject: Re: [Development] Preparing to release repackaged version of Qt > 4.8.3 with Digia copyrights > > Being a 3rd party observer and thoroughly reading all messages by Tuukkla I > anyway cannot understand the logic behind having 4.8.3-1 version instead of > suggested 4.8.4 with new copyrights, MinGW and SSL fixes. > What is wrong with releasing it right now and then process all the new > commits since 4.8.3 directly to 4.8.5? To my mind if a critical fix needs to > be released, 4.8.(N+1) can come out the next day or even hour after 4.8.N.
The idea was to release as quickly as possible a version with correct copyrights. And since the MinGW fix has been requested to include that as well. We have a large number of platforms to test in, many more than the CI systems currently verifies. So we have to have these tests run. Furthermore, 4.8 is a platform that provides binary installers done in both old and new way, so we need to test all these, in all platforms etc. So it just takes some time to see that everything is correct. 4.8 is already quite mature platform, and we really do not want to cause regressions. Even if it sometimes means it takes a bit of time to make the complete release. The security fix is already available as a patch, this is just a question of making the complete release with all installers etc. Hopefully this clarifies the rationale and why I originally wanted to proceed with 4.8.3-1, then concentrate more on 5.0 releases and do 4.8.4 later this year. As said we will not make 4.8.3-1 release through the Qt Project, but create the proper 4.8.4 according to the defined release process. PS. I do value the discussion in the mailing lists and feedback to the proposals, so do not get me wrong. Yours, Tuukka
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
