Re: [Development] Jira and issues left "In Progress"

[Giuseppe D'Angelo via Development]

Il 28/10/21 17:51, Thiago Macieira ha scritto:

That's probably sufficient nagging to the current assignee if they forgot the
issue in that state. If it still in progress after that long, they can move it
back to In Progress for another 3 months.


+1.

Thanks,

--
Giuseppe D'Angelo | giuseppe.dang...@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer
KDAB (France) S.A.S., a KDAB Group company
Tel. France +33 (0)4 90 84 08 53, http://www.kdab.com
KDAB - The Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts



smime.p7s
Description: Firma crittografica S/MIME
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Jira and issues left "In Progress"

[Thiago Macieira]

On Thursday, 28 October 2021 06:44:43 PDT Alex Blasche wrote:
> My proposal would be to return every "In Progress" issue to "Open" if there
> was no change for 3 month.
> 
> I'd appreciate your feedback.

That's probably sufficient nagging to the current assignee if they forgot the 
issue in that state. If it still in progress after that long, they can move it 
back to In Progress for another 3 months.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel DPG Cloud Engineering



___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Jira and issues left "In Progress"

[David Skoland]

Hi,

Sounds very reasonable. In Progress should communicate that the issue is being 
somewhat actively worked on. If it hasn’t been touched for 3 months, this 
clearly (or at least rarely) is not the case.

Cheers,

David Skoland

On 28 Oct 2021, at 15:44, Alex Blasche 
mailto:alexander.blas...@qt.io>> wrote:

Hi,

We have a growing problem with Jira issues forgotten in the "In Progress" 
state. For the 10 most important  Jira projects we currently have 600+ issues 
being stuck in the mentioned state. Since we recognize "In Progress" as a 
blocking state (not open for take over by other engineers), I believe we should 
keep the numbers small and mostly constraint to limited time frames.

By historical standard this is still much better than past times and I 
attribute most of it to the "Fixed" git tag which automatically closes Jira 
issues. Nevertheless of those "In Progress" issues about 170+ have not been 
touched (or were forgotten) for more than 3 months.

I would like to do something about this by adding some automation similar to 
the "Need more Info" automation. Those forgotten issues are likely not in 
progress anymore or were fixed a long time ago. I believe returning them to the 
"Open" state would trigger a re-evaluation by assignees (you). You either close 
them as already done or keep them in "Open" as you recognize them as not being 
done yet.

My proposal would be to return every "In Progress" issue to "Open" if there was 
no change for 3 month.

I'd appreciate your feedback.

--
Alex

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Jira and issues left "In Progress"

[Mitch Curtis]

> -Original Message-
> From: Development  On Behalf Of
> Alex Blasche
> Sent: Thursday, 28 October 2021 3:45 PM
> To: development@qt-project.org
> Subject: [Development] Jira and issues left "In Progress"
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We have a growing problem with Jira issues forgotten in the "In Progress"
> state. For the 10 most important  Jira projects we currently have 600+ issues
> being stuck in the mentioned state. Since we recognize "In Progress" as a
> blocking state (not open for take over by other engineers), I believe we
> should keep the numbers small and mostly constraint to limited time frames.
> 
> By historical standard this is still much better than past times and I 
> attribute
> most of it to the "Fixed" git tag which automatically closes Jira issues.
> Nevertheless of those "In Progress" issues about 170+ have not been
> touched (or were forgotten) for more than 3 months.
> 
> I would like to do something about this by adding some automation similar to
> the "Need more Info" automation. Those forgotten issues are likely not in
> progress anymore or were fixed a long time ago. I believe returning them to
> the "Open" state would trigger a re-evaluation by assignees (you). You either
> close them as already done or keep them in "Open" as you recognize them
> as not being done yet.
> 
> My proposal would be to return every "In Progress" issue to "Open" if there
> was no change for 3 month.
> 
> I'd appreciate your feedback.

Sounds good to me. I imagine the majority of those are just forgotten, like you 
said.
 
> --
> Alex
> 
> ___
> Development mailing list
> Development@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

[Development] Jira and issues left "In Progress"

[Alex Blasche]

Hi,

We have a growing problem with Jira issues forgotten in the "In Progress" 
state. For the 10 most important  Jira projects we currently have 600+ issues 
being stuck in the mentioned state. Since we recognize "In Progress" as a 
blocking state (not open for take over by other engineers), I believe we should 
keep the numbers small and mostly constraint to limited time frames.

By historical standard this is still much better than past times and I 
attribute most of it to the "Fixed" git tag which automatically closes Jira 
issues. Nevertheless of those "In Progress" issues about 170+ have not been 
touched (or were forgotten) for more than 3 months.

I would like to do something about this by adding some automation similar to 
the "Need more Info" automation. Those forgotten issues are likely not in 
progress anymore or were fixed a long time ago. I believe returning them to the 
"Open" state would trigger a re-evaluation by assignees (you). You either close 
them as already done or keep them in "Open" as you recognize them as not being 
done yet. 

My proposal would be to return every "In Progress" issue to "Open" if there was 
no change for 3 month. 

I'd appreciate your feedback.

--
Alex

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Nominating Doris Verria as Approver

[Timur Pocheptsov]

+1.

Best regards,
   Timur.

From: Development  on behalf of Lars Knoll 

Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 11:37 AM
To: Volker Hilsheimer 
Cc: Qt development mailing list 
Subject: Re: [Development] Nominating Doris Verria as Approver

I’ve worked with her a lot on the new Qt Multimedia module for Qt 6 and 
completely agree with Volker.

So +1 from my side :)

Cheers,
Lars

> On 27 Oct 2021, at 11:56, Volker Hilsheimer  wrote:
>
> Hello World,
>
> I’d like to nominate Doris Verria as approver in the Qt Project.
>
> Doris has been working as a Software Engineer for The Qt Company for over a 
> year, and has made great contributions to Qt [0]. I have come to appreciate 
> her as a coder that bravely takes on new challenges, and as a thorough code 
> reviewer [1].
>
> I’ll trust she’ll use the approver rights responsibly.
>
> Disclaimer: Doris reports directly to me in The Qt Company.
>
> Volker
>
>
> [0] https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/owner:doris.verria%2540qt.io
> [1] https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/reviewer:doris.verria%2540qt.io
>
>
> ___
> Development mailing list
> Development@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Nominating Oliver Eftevaag as Approver

[Mitch Curtis]

+1

From: Development  On Behalf Of Paul Wicking
Sent: Wednesday, 27 October 2021 6:25 AM
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: [Development] Nominating Oliver Eftevaag as Approver

Hi all,

I'd like to nominate Oliver Eftevaag as an approver.


Oliver has been working as a software engineer for the Qt Company for almost a 
year now and has made a fair number of contributions to Qt [0]. He also 
participates actively in reviews [1]. He's curious and passionate about 
learning new things, and happy to share his knowledge with his colleagues.

I trust he'll use the approver rights responsibly.

Disclaimer: we sporadically meet for lunch or by the coffee machine.
//! Paul

[0] - 
https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/owner:oliver.eftevaag%2540qt.io
[1] - 
https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/reviewer:oliver.eftevaag%2540qt.io
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Nominating Doris Verria as Approver

[Lars Knoll]

I’ve worked with her a lot on the new Qt Multimedia module for Qt 6 and 
completely agree with Volker. 

So +1 from my side :)

Cheers,
Lars

> On 27 Oct 2021, at 11:56, Volker Hilsheimer  wrote:
> 
> Hello World,
> 
> I’d like to nominate Doris Verria as approver in the Qt Project.
> 
> Doris has been working as a Software Engineer for The Qt Company for over a 
> year, and has made great contributions to Qt [0]. I have come to appreciate 
> her as a coder that bravely takes on new challenges, and as a thorough code 
> reviewer [1].
> 
> I’ll trust she’ll use the approver rights responsibly.
> 
> Disclaimer: Doris reports directly to me in The Qt Company.
> 
> Volker
> 
> 
> [0] https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/owner:doris.verria%2540qt.io
> [1] https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/reviewer:doris.verria%2540qt.io
> 
> 
> ___
> Development mailing list
> Development@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Nominating Doris Verria as Approver

[Shawn Rutledge]

+1

> On 2021 Oct 28, at 10:14, Jan-Arve Sæther  wrote:
> 
> +1
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Development  On Behalf Of Volker 
> Hilsheimer
> Sent: onsdag 27. oktober 2021 11:56
> To: development@qt-project.org
> Subject: [Development] Nominating Doris Verria as Approver
> 
> Hello World,
> 
> I’d like to nominate Doris Verria as approver in the Qt Project.
> 
> Doris has been working as a Software Engineer for The Qt Company for over a 
> year, and has made great contributions to Qt [0]. I have come to appreciate 
> her as a coder that bravely takes on new challenges, and as a thorough code 
> reviewer [1].
> 
> I’ll trust she’ll use the approver rights responsibly.
> 
> Disclaimer: Doris reports directly to me in The Qt Company.
> 
> Volker
> 
> 
> [0] https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/owner:doris.verria%2540qt.io
> [1] https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/reviewer:doris.verria%2540qt.io
> 
> 
> ___
> Development mailing list
> Development@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
> ___
> Development mailing list
> Development@qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Nominating Oliver Eftevaag as Approver

[Jan-Arve Sæther]

+1

From: Development  On Behalf Of Paul Wicking
Sent: onsdag 27. oktober 2021 06:25
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: [Development] Nominating Oliver Eftevaag as Approver

Hi all,

I'd like to nominate Oliver Eftevaag as an approver.


Oliver has been working as a software engineer for the Qt Company for almost a 
year now and has made a fair number of contributions to Qt [0]. He also 
participates actively in reviews [1]. He's curious and passionate about 
learning new things, and happy to share his knowledge with his colleagues.

I trust he'll use the approver rights responsibly.

Disclaimer: we sporadically meet for lunch or by the coffee machine.
//! Paul

[0] - 
https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/owner:oliver.eftevaag%2540qt.io
[1] - 
https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/reviewer:oliver.eftevaag%2540qt.io
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] Nominating Doris Verria as Approver

[Jan-Arve Sæther]

+1

-Original Message-
From: Development  On Behalf Of Volker 
Hilsheimer
Sent: onsdag 27. oktober 2021 11:56
To: development@qt-project.org
Subject: [Development] Nominating Doris Verria as Approver

Hello World,

I’d like to nominate Doris Verria as approver in the Qt Project.

Doris has been working as a Software Engineer for The Qt Company for over a 
year, and has made great contributions to Qt [0]. I have come to appreciate her 
as a coder that bravely takes on new challenges, and as a thorough code 
reviewer [1].

I’ll trust she’ll use the approver rights responsibly.

Disclaimer: Doris reports directly to me in The Qt Company.

Volker


[0] https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/owner:doris.verria%2540qt.io
[1] https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/reviewer:doris.verria%2540qt.io


___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] QtPositioning and QtLocation split

[Daniel Smith]

Thanks for reporting the issues Thiago. Looks like the process for setting up 
the new repo wasn't fully completed.

HEAD now points to dev correctly.
Github mirror has been created and replicated.

-Daniel

From: Development  On Behalf Of Ivan Solovev
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 9:49 AM
To: Macieira, Thiago ; development@qt-project.org
Subject: Re: [Development] QtPositioning and QtLocation split

Created https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTQAINFRA-4624

Thanks for pointing that out.

Best regards,

Ivan Solovev
Senior 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

From: Development 
mailto:development-boun...@qt-project.org>> 
on behalf of Thiago Macieira 
mailto:thiago.macie...@intel.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2021 7:21 PM
To: development@qt-project.org 
mailto:development@qt-project.org>>
Subject: Re: [Development] QtPositioning and QtLocation split

On Wednesday, 27 October 2021 03:01:27 PDT Ivan Solovev wrote:
> QtPositioning module is already moved to its own repo -
> qt/qtpositioning.git, which can be cloned from
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/qt/qtpositioning

GitHub mirror is missing.

--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel DPG Cloud Engineering



___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] QtPositioning and QtLocation split

[Ivan Solovev]

Created https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTQAINFRA-4624

Thanks for pointing that out.

Best regards,

Ivan Solovev
Senior 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

From: Development  on behalf of Thiago 
Macieira 
Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2021 7:21 PM
To: development@qt-project.org 
Subject: Re: [Development] QtPositioning and QtLocation split

On Wednesday, 27 October 2021 03:01:27 PDT Ivan Solovev wrote:
> QtPositioning module is already moved to its own repo -
> qt/qtpositioning.git, which can be cloned from
> https://codereview.qt-project.org/qt/qtpositioning

GitHub mirror is missing.

--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel DPG Cloud Engineering



___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] moc output from non-local tool build

[Joerg Bornemann]

On 10/27/21 7:18 PM, Thiago Macieira wrote:

On Friday, 10 September 2021 07:58:55 PDT Thiago Macieira wrote:

Qt 6 supports using the moc from a different build of Qt, to help with the
bootstrapping issue and also so you don't always run a debug-mode moc in
your debug builds of Qt.

Is that moc required to be from the same Qt version as the Qt you're trying
to build? Or is there a leeway in accepting slightly different builds?

We haven't yet made changes to the moc output that would make it
incompatible, but I am thinking of doing that now for plugins and I'd like
to know if I have to keep compatibility with a slightly older moc. It's not
a problem, I just want to know if this is required.


ping for decision prior to 6.3 feature freeze.


With https://codereview.qt-project.org/c/qt/qtbase/+/378053 it's now 
possible to turn off the package version check and to use moc of a 
different Qt version.  This requires that moc stays either compatible or 
handles that /version argument outlined elsewhere in this thread.



Joerg
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development