On 3/18/13 12:04 PM, "Sean Harmer" <[email protected]> wrote:
>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? If required, we can always create that branch later on (ie. branch from the latest sha1 in stable before we merged dev back to stable). Is there a real reason why we should do it now? I don't really see one. Cheers, Lars _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
