On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 07:49:28AM +0200, Tuukka Turunen wrote: > Hi, > > With Qt 5.9 beta released last week, I think we should close 5.8 branch > now. > it's done.
as usual, i'm expecting a flurry of retargeting requests (not on this list! gah). > Closing 5.8 will help getting Qt 5.9 out in time by pushing everything > directly into 5.9 branch. This is already the case for most items, but > some items are still pushed to 5.8 branch causing the need for continuous > merges and delaying getting those fixes to 5.9. Running the merges and > submodule updates also causes load to the CI, which is away from doing > more frequent runs on 5.9 and dev. > > There has been a lot of discussion about this in the mailing lists, I > think the two ones below sum it up quite well. > > Yours, > > Tuukka > > On 13/03/2017, 13.33, "Development on behalf of Oswald Buddenhagen" > <[email protected] on behalf of > [email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 01:38:47PM +0100, Marc Mutz wrote: > > On Wednesday 01 March 2017 13:13:17 Lars Knoll wrote: > > > > Let's conclude this topic now by moving on towards 5.9 as Tuukka > > > > proposed. After some thinking I also agree that this is the best > > > > course of action from where we are right now. > > > > > > This also implies that bug fixes should now get pushed to the 5.9 > > > branch and we should close the 5.8 branch soon. > > > > I disagree. Even if you cannot produce releases from 5.8 anymore, > > that's our stable branch. > > > that may be the case, but doesn't necessarily mean that you need to > upstream your fixes there. closing it only affects other users of the > 5.8 tip who want your fixes. probably not that many. > > otoh, the branch being open costs CI cycles and causes some forward > merging effort, while benefitting a marginal number of people. > > another point is that most tqtc employees are actually following the > management order and are neglecting 5.8 (for two months now), which > means that it's by far not as stable as one would want it to be. > > so i guess it's time to give in and officially close the branch. > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > [email protected] > [1]http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development > > > On 01/03/2017, 21.58, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira" > <[email protected] on behalf of > [email protected]> wrote: > > Em quarta-feira, 1 de marc,o de 2017, `as 04:38:47 PST, Marc Mutz > escreveu: > > > This also implies that bug fixes should now get pushed to the 5.9 > branch > > > and we should close the 5.8 branch soon. > > > > I disagree. Even if you cannot produce releases from 5.8 anymore, > that's our > > stable branch. 5.9 isn't stable, yet. If you release 5.9.0, *then* > you can > > close 5.8. Do you really want stuff from 5.9 cherry-picked to 5.6? > > We usually switch the default branch between the beta and the RC, so > the point > is moot. > > 5.9 will be considered stable in a couple of weeks, so 5.8 can be > closed. > > -- > Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com > Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center > > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > [email protected] > [2]http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development > > Links: > 1. http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development > 2. http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
