On Monday 18 March 2013 11:00:57 Turunen Tuukka wrote: > On 18.3.2013 12.42, "Sean Harmer" <[email protected]> wrote: > >On Monday 18 March 2013 10:27:45 Shaw Andy wrote: > >> > Making of Qt 5.1 minor release will soon start: > >> > > >> > - Plan is to move 'dev' into 'stable' branch on March 19th. > >> > > >> > - After March 19th any changes that are required to get in for 5.1 > >> > > >> > need to be pushed into 'stable' branch. So if your needed changes > >> > >>don't > >> > >> > make it today, > >> > > >> > please wait after the merge is done and re-target it. > >> > > >> > - I haven't planed to create any branch yet for commits already in > >> > 'stable' and not in 'release'. So speak up if this is needed. > >> > > >> > - If we decide to do 5.0.3, it could be done from the 'release' > >> > >>branch. > >> > >> Considering that people have been developing on stable on the basis > >> > >>that it > >> > >> is in fact 5.0.x, I think we should at least make sure that those > >> > >>changes > >> > >> end up somewhere in case we do a 5.0.3 release for whatever reason. > >> > >>Rather > >> > >> than lose those changes because we merged, could a read only branch be > >> created from the current stable and then merge that into release should > >> > >>a > >> > >> 5.0.3 release happen? So no more work would be done for 5.0.x unless it > >> > >>is > >> > >> decided to make a 5.0.3 release. > > > >I agree. 5.0.3 may never happen but this is good practise and a sensible > >precaution to take in case we do decide to release one. > > It is not very likely that someone decides to stay with 5.0.x, so whatever > we do should be such that encourages users to get to 5.1.x, thus we do not > need 5.0.x to overlap with 5.1.x as we do with 4.8.x. > > As you know 5.0.2 is in the works to be out soon and will introduce a > great number of fixes over 5.0.1. I hope they are enough to carry us to > 5.1.0. > > I see three reasons for making 5.0.3: > > -> A security issue mandating immediate fix release => that can and should > be done on top of 5.0.2 with a minimal amount of fixes directly in the > release branch > -> A 'brown paper bag' issue in 5.0.2 mandating fix and making or 5.0.3 to > have something usable => that can and should be done in the release branch > with very small amount of changes to 5.0.2 > -> Severe problems in getting 5.1 out increasing the need of getting 5.0.3 > => In this situation everyone doing releases is working with 5.1, so even > if there is a need, we can not make 5.0.3 without causing even more > problems to 5.1 (please not that this is a theoretical situation, I do not > expect any problems with 5.1) > > Thus I think that it is enough to tag the stable branch before we merge > from dev. In case we ever need to get the situation before, it can be done > easily.
Since you list several reasons why we may well need a Qt 5.0.3, then why not do it properly and just make a branch as Andy suggests? What is the downside? Cheers, Sean -- Dr Sean Harmer | [email protected] | Senior Software Engineer Klarälvdalens Datakonsult AB, a KDAB Group company Tel. Sweden (HQ) +46-563-540090, USA +1-866-777-KDAB(5322) KDAB - Qt Experts - Platform-independent software solutions _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
