On Friday 12 August 2016 13:18:52 Lars Knoll wrote: > > On 12 Aug 2016, at 12:01, Olivier Goffart <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Freitag, 12. August 2016 10:52:52 CEST Marc Mutz wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> > >> > >> I'd like to know what the rules are supposed to for submitting to 5.6 > >> (LTS). > >> > >> > >> > >> Should we enforce the strict rules of other minor releases (only > >> regressions and P2+)? > >> > >> > >> > >> IMHO, 5.6 is not like 5.5. So with another 2+ years of 5.6 lifetime, > >> more relaxed rules should apply. > > > > > > > > In my interpretation, LTS means it's just a stable branch, but that will > > stay maintained longer, with the same criterias as normal stable > > branches. > > [https://wiki.qt.io/Branch_Guidelines#Where_to_push_a_change.3F] That > > is, we make sure it works longer with more recent compiler/platform and > > keep security patches or crashes patches. > > Yes, same criteria as normal stable branches apply. The difference is that > we might (but don't have to) do some additional work to ensure 5.6 works > on newer OS versions if they come out during the lifetime of 5.6.
Well, we told people "look, Qt 5.7 will drop support for your platform, and require C++11, but don't worry: you have 5.6 LTS". I doubt those people would be happy if they didn't get their bugs fixed because they don't involve crashes or security exploits. And if you look at what goes into 5.6, I don't buy that they're all critical crash or security fixes. The masses vote with their feet. Don't shoot the messenger. I think 5.6 is better for it. _Now_ you can shoot :) Thanks, Marc -- Marc Mutz <[email protected]> | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company Tel: +49-30-521325470 KDAB - Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
