On Mar 18, 2013, at 4:18 PM, Knoll Lars <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 3/18/13 3:22 PM, "Oswald Buddenhagen" <[email protected]> > wrote: >>> >> i'd like to raise a formal objection. >> >> CI was virtually unusable for two weeks now. >> due to that there is a completely unreasonable backlog of changes meant >> for 5.1 now. it makes no sense to re-target (or even deny them) due to >> infrastructure problems. > > We have said that we'll move to time based releases. Should we stop this > because we aren't yet good enough in controlling our systems? I don't > think so. It might feel unfair to some people, but we've had these > discussions about some features missing the deadline every single minor > release. Well, a central component of time-based releases is that it's actually possible to plan your work to meet the deadline. My current rate is spending several days per change. We should stop and make our systems usable. > > Now if there are one or two features that are vital to make Qt 5.1 > possible, we can discuss exceptions for those. But then we need to make > sure they go in in the next two days. Which features would these be? I would like to get https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,49452 in to support HighDpi on Mac. I have several changes after that but they are all bug fixes and can go into stable. But how can I make sure it goes in the next two days? Morten _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
