Em sex 23 maio 2014, às 12:51:40, Turunen Tuukka escreveu: > >> then bite the bullet and call it 5.3.1. > > > >that's "a lot" of work (from the packaging perspective)
I really don't see how changing the version one way is a lot more work than changing the version number the other way. The version number is changing in the sources *anyway*. Yes, it is. Whatever we release now, whenever we release, MUST have a different version number. Otherwise, we won't be able to tell Imagine someone reports a crash-on-startup bug on Android in a few months, how will we know whether they're using the original 5.3.0 or the patched version? And yes, we have to rebuild everything for any new release, otherwise we'll get users asking "why is there no 5.3.1/5.3.0.1 for Windows?". > And it is also not good idea from user¹s viewpoint as it causes quite some > hassle in the messaging. Agreed. Any release we put out now will raise questions. A new release within a week of the previous is called a "brown paper bag release" (because you have to put a brown paper bag over your head in shame for the previous release). And as Tuukka said, this release seems to be quite solid, so it does not qualify as brown paper bag. So I think that putting out a release right now will send the wrong message. (Note, there seems to be an important regression on OS X as well, see QTBUG-38874) In any case, if this is done, please don't use the dash to indicate a new version. The correct is 5.3.1, but failing that, use 5.3.0.1 or (following the last 3.3 releases), 5.3.0b. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Releasing mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/releasing
