On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 8:50 PM, Konstantin Ritt <[email protected]> wrote: > Can't it be a private API in 5.1?
That's a good idea. Why didn't I think of that? That also provides more flexibility while working towards unification. If it goes in as private API, does it still fall subject to the feature freeze? Or would feature freeze only apply to its attempt to go public next release? -- Alan Alpert _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
