On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 11:08 PM, Thiago Macieira <[email protected]> wrote: > Here's a question to the project: do we want to merge (-s ours) the releases > from vendors into our official tree? And do we want their tags too?
Speaking with my Mer Project (/Jolla) hat on: I don't think direct merges would work, at least for our case. There are sometimes changes we have that cannot be upstreamed. For instance, we (still) have MeeGo's XInput2 patch against Qt 4, which we can't apply, thanks to the rules of the branch. We also have a bunch of changes that would equate to a QtQuick 1.2, and I'm guessing that isn't really acceptable upstream (even if it would probably be nicer both for the users of Qt, and for me when looking at our large patch delta...). We also don't really do tagging, as our release process happens separately from the git tree. I maintain our packaging as the upstream tarball plus a set of patches, as I'm firmly convinced that there's less "bus factor" there than distributing a massively hacked up tarball. I do have a git branch published (https://github.com/rburchell/qt), but like the warning on the tree says, it can (and is) rebased often. I do encourage (and participate in) pushing stuff upstream where that is possible though, and some of our changes (like allowing configuration of QApplication's startDragDistance property) might be useful to push, but I'm unconvinced that our current approach (an environment var) is the best possible solution - but haven't been able to think of a better one, either :-). _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
