> On 9 Feb 2018, at 07:52, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kof...@chello.at> wrote: > > André Pönitz wrote: >> I think you need to start differentiating between Qt-without-Webengine >> and QtWebengine. >> >> And maybe "we" should do that, too. > > I would be entirely in favor of separate (more frequent and/or more aligned > with Chromium security fixes) QtWebEngine releases. I am already updating > QtWebEngine in Fedora on a separate schedule from the core Qt updates (with > the intent of delivering security updates faster), so it would not be a > problem for me if the releases were entirely separate. And it would surely > get security fixes delivered in a more timely manner.
We’ve been discussing this in the past, and most people agreed that releasing QtWebEngine on an independent schedule would be a good thing. But there’s still a couple of things that need sorting out before that can happen, both in the CI and how we create/package our product and SDK as well as in QtWebengine which for example still uses private API of some other parts of Qt. Cheers, Lars _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
