On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Knoll Lars <lars.kn...@digia.com> wrote:
> I know that branch naming is a possible topic for endless bike shedding. > You can always find arguments against a certain name here. In the end it's > not the most important thing whether it's called testing or stable. It's > the meaning that we as a community associate with the branch name that's > important. > In my opinion, d3fault now raised a valid concern from usability point of view this time. > But to shorten this: We've had that discussion a couple of months ago, and > the names mentioned are the ones we in the end agreed to. let's stick to > these. I won't re-open that discussion again. > As I have seen, there was no common agreement in the thread [1], and you have not posted any Chief maintainer decision either right in there. Please you could close a thread next time with your decision in such cases right in there? Really, I had the belief for this reason up to now that there was no accepted solution. Laszlo * http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2012-September/006706.html
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
