[Development] requesting an own 4.8-blackberry10 branch on gitorious

[Laszlo Papp]

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Turunen Tuukka <Tuukka.Turunen at digia.com>wrote:

>
> On 17.12.2012 15.55, "Peter Hartmann" <phartmann at rim.com> wrote:
>
> >Hello,
> >
> >would it be possible to get an own 4.8-blackberry10 branch on gitorious
> >in the qt repo (https://qt.gitorious.org/qt/qt), similar to the
> >4.8.0-symbian branch that still exists?
> >
> >The thing is for BlackBerry 10 we are working as close to upstream (i.e.
> >4.8 branch) as possible, but due to some features we needed that are
> >hard to get into 4.8 (e.g.
> >https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,39135) and turnaround time for
> >getting patches into Qt 4 (+ getting them into Qt 5 first), it would be
> >good if we had an own dedicated branch for it.
> >
> >We could point people to it in case they want to compile Qt themselves
> >for BlackBerry 10, and make sure everybody working on it (us and KDAB)
> >is using exactly the same branch.
> >
> >Alternatively I guess we could just clone the repo into a team clone.
> >
> >Peter
>
>
> We can discuss this, but personally I am not that fond of creating
> platform specific branches. I think the drawbacks of these clearly
> outweight the benefits in long run.
>
> If your problem is mainly turnaround time for getting things in it may be
> due to many being busy with getting Qt 5.0.0 out. In general we are still
> welcoming improvements to 4.8 as long as they are not behavioral or public
> API changes.
>

There may be several reasons, but I faced issues like getting "Do not
submit" without a clear explanation (at least for me). Then I had to wait
1-2 days to get a clear explanation what could be improved. I can
understand if such a thing gets blocker for someone.

Whether or not it is a CI problem, or something else, it does not matter
much for the _moment_ since it remains a problem as of now until fixed.

Laszlo
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20121217/5d53aa9c/attachment.html>