Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Tuukka Turunen
Hi, To comment a bit this discussion, I think that with Qt 5.10 as the first release after the LTS it might be fine to stop after .1, but in general I would not want to set such a rule. To me the question at hand is should we skip Qt 5.10.2 release if that means we can put more fixes into Qt

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Kevin Kofler
Tuukka Turunen wrote: > Users prefer LTS releases According to what statistics? Also keep in mind that distributions will download Qt once and redistribute it to thousands of users. And also that there are 2 classes of Qt users: application developers and end users. Such a bold claim really

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Lars Knoll
> On 29 Jan 2018, at 10:00, Uwe Rathmann wrote: > > On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 06:59:06 +, Jani Heikkinen wrote: > >> - '5.6' will move in 'very strict' mode - '5.9' will move in 'strict' >> mode. > > This type of discussion has to be lead, before making a LTS promise !

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Giuseppe D'Angelo
On 29/01/18 07:59, Jani Heikkinen wrote: > We have currently really many branches open: > - 5.6 > - 5.9 > - 5.10 > - 5.10.1 > - 5.11 > - dev > > In my opinion this is too much to handle effectively, especially because > there is many branches in stable mode (see >

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Jani Heikkinen
> -Original Message- > From: Ville Voutilainen [mailto:ville.voutilai...@gmail.com] > Sent: maanantai 29. tammikuuta 2018 9.50 > To: Jani Heikkinen > Cc: development@qt-project.org > Subject: Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those > > On

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Simon Hausmann
Hi, I feel that we are generally guiding our users towards the LTS releases. The minor releases appear to address in particular users who need a particular feature before it hits the next LTS release. In the light of that, I think it would be better to keep the LTS branches open longer and

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Ville Voutilainen
On 29 January 2018 at 10:06, Jani Heikkinen wrote: >> On 29 January 2018 at 08:59, Jani Heikkinen wrote: >> > - '5.6' will move in 'very strict' mode >> > - '5.9' will move in 'strict' mode. So no direct submissions anymore, >> > just cherry picks from

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Uwe Rathmann
On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 06:59:06 +, Jani Heikkinen wrote: > - '5.6' will move in 'very strict' mode - '5.9' will move in 'strict' > mode. This type of discussion has to be lead, before making a LTS promise ! Trying to change this later - without having any argument beside, that maintaining

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Jani Heikkinen
> -Original Message- > From: Development [mailto:development-bounces+jani.heikkinen=qt.io@qt- > project.org] On Behalf Of Giuseppe D'Angelo > Sent: maanantai 29. tammikuuta 2018 11.31 > To: development@qt-project.org > Subject: Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Bogdan Vatra
Hi, As long as we don't have enough time fix all the problems in a non LTS release, I think releasing at least one patch version is not that bad ... Yours, BogDan. În ziua de luni, 29 ianuarie 2018, la 10:15:51 EET, Simon Hausmann a scris: > Hi, > > > I feel that we are generally guiding

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Konstantin Tokarev
29.01.2018, 11:16, "Simon Hausmann" : > Hi, > > I feel that we are generally guiding our users towards the LTS releases. The > minor releases appear to address in particular users who need a particular > feature before it hits the next LTS release. > > In the light of

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Simon Hausmann
Right, so one patch release per non-LTS minor release to fix bloopers :) Simon From: Konstantin Tokarev Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 1:27:49 PM To: Simon Hausmann; Jani Heikkinen; development@qt-project.org Subject: Re: [Development] Qt

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Kevin Kofler
Simon Hausmann wrote: > In the light of that, I think it would be better to keep the LTS branches > open longer and stop doing patch releases for minor releases that are not > LTS. -1 from a distro packager perspective. LTS just does not fit together with fast-moving distributions, and we really

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Paolo Angelelli
On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 10:31:14 +0100 Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote: > On 29/01/18 07:59, Jani Heikkinen wrote: > > We have currently really many branches open: > > - 5.6 > > - 5.9 > > - 5.10 > > - 5.10.1 > > - 5.11 > > - dev > > > > In my opinion this is too much to handle

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Adam Treat
“stop doing patch releases for minor releases that are not LTS.” +1 _ From: Simon Hausmann Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 3:16 AM Subject: Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those To: Jani Heikkinen

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Kevin Kofler
Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote: > I don't agree, 5.10 releases should be done on a regular basis until > 5.11.1 is out (Yes, .1, many users don't upgrade to .0 versions...) +1, I also agree with you and therefore disagree with the original proposal. Especially security warrants always having one

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Konstantin Tokarev
29.01.2018, 15:30, "Simon Hausmann" : > Right, so one patch release per non-LTS minor release to fix bloopers :) If there are bugs featured in "Known Issues" which can be fixed in reasonable time they could be merged directly to 5.x.1 branch after 1-week deadline as an

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Thiago Macieira
On segunda-feira, 29 de janeiro de 2018 04:10:02 PST Adam Treat wrote: > “stop doing patch releases for minor releases that are not LTS.” > > +1 So long as we "stop after the .1" Just look at how many distributions skipped 5.8 entirely because it didn't have a .1. That was a huge mistake on

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Kevin Kofler
Konstantin Tokarev wrote: > Note that you can build newer QtWebEngine releases against LTS Qt I know, and I am already doing this, but this does not help if there is no newer QtWebEngine release to begin with! Even taking a snapshot is typically not an option because security fixes are only

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Florian Bruhin
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 02:32:58PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Simon Hausmann wrote: > > In the light of that, I think it would be better to keep the LTS branches > > open longer and stop doing patch releases for minor releases that are not > > LTS. > > -1 from a distro packager perspective. LTS

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Tuukka Turunen
Hi, This is not an either-or thing. Of course both having new feature releases and stable LTS are important. I am not claiming otherwise. My point is that there are more users for the LTS versions, thus I used the expression. There are a lot of users for both, we do not need to have a poll to

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Konstantin Tokarev
29.01.2018, 16:33, "Kevin Kofler" : > Simon Hausmann wrote: >>  In the light of that, I think it would be better to keep the LTS branches >>  open longer and stop doing patch releases for minor releases that are not >>  LTS. > > -1 from a distro packager perspective. LTS

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Thiago Macieira
On segunda-feira, 29 de janeiro de 2018 21:57:38 PST Tuukka Turunen wrote: > Hi, > > This is not an either-or thing. Of course both having new feature releases > and stable LTS are important. I am not claiming otherwise. My point is that > there are more users for the LTS versions, thus I used

Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

2018-01-29 Thread Jani Heikkinen
> -Original Message- > From: Development [mailto:development-bounces+jani.heikkinen=qt.io@qt- > project.org] On Behalf Of Kevin Kofler > Sent: maanantai 29. tammikuuta 2018 15.33 > To: development@qt-project.org > Subject: Re: [Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those