Hi Kevin,
As has been said many times, features of Qt 5.9 have already been developed and
frozen, development of Qt 5.10 features is ongoing. Postponing or reopening Qt
5.9 would mean we work very inefficiently and that should be avoided. There are
also many other reasons, as I have explained in multiple mails to the mailing
lists. No-one likes skipping patch level releases, but this is what now needs
to be done. Qt 5.7.1 has been released in December and Qt 5.8.0 in January – so
we do have very recent two releases you and others to use.
What comes to Open Governance, we of course can always improve communications.
What was done is that I informed decision that The Qt Company had done not to
participate in making Qt 5.8.1 release and based on that the Release team of
the Qt Project decided to close Qt 5.8 branch. Some people volunteered to help
in making Qt 5.8.1, which is great but... the current infrastructure does not
enable making a new patch release without a significant effort from The Qt
Company personnel as well as a major load in the systems. Therefore, I have
proposed that we all rather focus on getting Qt 5.9.0 and 5.9.1 out faster and
improve the stability of the infrastructure (including fixing the flaky test
cases).
We have many users still in Qt 5.6 LTS, which is fine, but eventually we need
to provide new releases that receive more than one patch level release.
Hopefully we can do this for Qt 5.9 with the new CI system infrastructure
coming around June timeframe as well as the improve stability of the system
achieved via fixing the flaky cases.
Yours,
Tuukka
On 04/03/2017, 0.56, "Development on behalf of Kevin Kofler"
<[email protected] on behalf of
[email protected]> wrote:
Mathias Hasselmann wrote:
> Guys, by not delivering bugfix releases for arbitrary reasons we are
> risking to kill Qt's credibility as reliable toolkit. Our users trust in
> getting bugfix releases.
I agree with this. I really don't see why you don't postpone 5.9 instead.
Qt
used to release on a 9 to 12 month basis, now it is down to 6 months. And
for 5.9, not even that, because somehow there is an unrealistic expectation
that 5.9 magically makes up for the delays in releasing 5.8. The release
schedule for 5.9 should be based on the actual 5.8 release date, not the
planned 5.8 release date. The amount of churn is such that some distros are
still working on packaging 5.8 while you are already about to branch 5.9.
I also agree with Marc Mutz (and no, you have not misread ;-) ) that the
way
the decision is being dictated onto the community runs counter to the "Open
Governance" promises.
Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
