Hi, TL;DR: do _not_ approve patches that do not "pick-to:" according to QUIP-16 or explain in the commit message why they deviate.
Long version: Just a reminder that QUIP-16¹ gives detailed instructions how far certain sets of changes should be picked, so all maintainers / all approvers should check that the kind of change they are reviewing and the Pick-to:s supplied by the patch author matches QUIP-16. If not, the commit message should contain an explanation for why the Pick-to's deviate from QUIP-16, esp. when picking back less than QUIP-16 asks. Otherwise, do _not_ approve. Branch categorization as per QUIP-16: - Stable: 6.8 - Strict: 6.5 - Very Strict: 5.15 (we do not plan more releases from 6.2 at this point, for the purposes of QUIP-16, it's Very Strict) So UB fixes should go to 6.5, as should be big-O improvements. If an UB or big-O fix is a security issue, it get picked to _all_ branches. References: ¹ https://contribute.qt-project.org/quips/16 Also pertinent: - https://wiki.qt.io/Things_To_Look_Out_For_In_Reviews#Commit_Message Items 1, 3, and 4 - https://wiki.qt.io/Commit_Policy Items 7, 8, and 9. - discussion extending QUIP-16 to allow more refactorings: https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/meta/quips/+/608523 Thanks, Marc -- Marc Mutz <marc.m...@qt.io> (he/his) Principal Software Engineer The Qt Company Erich-Thilo-Str. 10 12489 Berlin, Germany www.qt.io Geschäftsführer: Mika Pälsi, Juha Varelius, Jouni Lintunen Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 144331 B -- Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
