wow, this title is so completely incorrect and taken out of context..... On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 4:15 PM Vlad Stelmahovsky <[email protected]> wrote:
> you guys getting "famous": > https://www.theregister.com/2021/01/05/qt_lts_goes_commercial_only/ > > On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 12:15 PM Volker Hilsheimer <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > On 5 Jan 2021, at 21:18, Max Paperno <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > On 1/5/2021 1:02 PM, Adam Light wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 7:56 AM Volker Hilsheimer < >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Apart from that: is Qt 5.15.2 really so broken that people can’t use >> >> it without getting more patches? >> >> I can't speak to 5.15 as we decided not to upgrade since it's not a >> real LTS release (we do not believe we are eligible to purchase a >> commercial license), but the minor fixes that come later in LTS releases >> (5.9 and 5.12) have often fixed problems our users have reported in our >> application, particularly on macOS. Due to behavior changes in different Qt >> minor versions (again, primarily on macOS), we typically change the Qt >> minor version only when we release a new major version of our application >> (~every 2-3 years). >> >> LTS releases have been critical in our successful use of Qt, and I am >> not sure what will happen moving forward. >> >> Adam >> > >> > Hear, hear. Stuck on 5.12 here. >> > >> > Working on OS projects, commercial is not even an option, and resources >> (e.g. for testing/fixing on every new Qt release) are very limited (read: >> one person often does everything). E.g. testing one app on 5.14.1 yielded 3 >> breaking Qt issues which had to be fixed upstream, and mostly didn't make >> it into .2 either. LTS (after like a .3 or so update) is the only way to go >> IMHO, the others are for testing/playing. >> > >> > I'm so sick of "scheduled releases come hell or high water" in the >> programming world (in general, not just Qt). The quality is (usually) >> crap. Once upon a time this release quality was called >> Alpha/Beta/Preview/NFP (not for production). Qt6 has literally been called >> as being "primarily" for testing/feedback. That's a new major release >> now? /further rant aborted >> > >> > Sorry, I'm only passionate about it because I love what Qt does and I >> love when it does it well and consistently. Everyone who's helped make it >> that way is my hero, thank you! >> > >> > -Max >> >> >> Hi Max and Adam, >> >> >> What can do better to avoid such regressions from making it into a >> release, or preferably into the code, in the first place? Nobody, not even >> the Qt Company management :P *wants* to release crappy quality on time. >> >> What we know about those bugs is that they passed all code reviews, and >> didn’t get caught by any of the thousands of tests we run for every change >> on half a dozen platforms. And we know that the only way they were >> discovered is real users testing real applications against the released >> version of Qt. >> >> So, what we have is clearly not good enough, but if the last 15 years of >> writing unit tests etc hasn’t gotten us to a better place, then maybe “more >> of the same” can’t be the only strategy. >> >> Is your experience that we release stuff “come hell or high water" in >> spite of severe bugs being reported during beta testing? We do spend a lot >> of time triaging incoming bug reports, and a severe enough bug can always >> block a release. >> >> Or do we not discover the issues until the .0 release because few people >> test the pre-releases? That seems to be supported by the data we have about >> downloads and general activity in response to pre-releases. >> >> >> Volker >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Development mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development >> > > > -- > Best regards, > Vlad > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development >
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
