On sábado, 18 de fevereiro de 2017 12:11:53 PST Mat Sutcliffe wrote: > On 18 February 2017 at 19:13, Thiago Macieira <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > On sábado, 18 de fevereiro de 2017 06:36:07 PST Mat Sutcliffe wrote: > > > Keeping 5.9.0 on schedule even while 5.8.0 blows past its planned > > > release > > > date would seem to be appropriate when you have the capability to > > > concurrently maintain two minor (not patchlevel) release branches. > > > > That's exactly what Tuukka proposed we do. We keep 5.9.0 on schedule and, > > because of that, 5.8.1 becomes impossible and unnecessary. > > My point was that this decision happened already on 29 November. That was > the original planned release date for 5.8.0, and also the day on which the > 5.9.0 initial schedule was set. Could it have been predicted at that time > what the consequences might be for 5.8.1?
Hindsight is 20/20. Let's not rehash coulda-woulda-shoulda. The question is only what to do now. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
