[Development] Becoming a Tier 1 platform and the CI System

[Turunen Tuukka]

On 7.6.2012 13.15, "Sean Harmer" <sean.harmer at kdab.com> wrote:

>On Thursday 07 June 2012 06:21:04 Turunen Tuukka wrote:
>> At Digia, Qt Commercial, we have our own CI & release test system which
>>is
>> based on an Atlassian tool called Bamboo. We have a much wider set of
>> platforms and configurations running than in the Nokia CI system, but we
>> value very much the continuous testing done by the Nokia CI system for
>>the
>> Qt Project reference platforms.
>
>I would ask then why does Digia not use the same infrastructure, and
>improve 
>Qt-Project's to ensure that Qt Commercial stays the commercial version of
>Qt, 
>and does not become something only vaguely related with a similar name.
>Sharing these test suites and results would be more in-line with the
>spirit of 
>the Qt project.

Well, that is what we are doing already. The fact that Nokia CI runs Pulse
and ours runs Bamboo, does not mean anything. It is the procedures and
people that matter. And those we are sharing already.

>
>> So naturally a small set of reference platforms means better capability
>>to
>> focus efforts, release in time, and have good maturity of releases on
>>these
>> platforms.
>
>So you are recommending to not grow the Qt ecosystem to new platforms?
>That 
>seems counter-productive. If entities are willing to invest and work on
>improving support for Qt on new platforms to the point where they are
>very 
>well supported such that the quality of the overall offering does not
>suffer, 
>then surely that can only be good for the Qt community.

Of course we can and should take new platforms in. I just mean that it
should be a conscious decision, as for every release things get more
complex when number of platforms grows.

I have nothing against new platforms as such, especially not QNX that is
very valuable to commercial users as well ;)

Yours,

		Tuukka