[Development] Binary incompatible changes to Qt 4.8

[Robin Burchell]

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Stephen Kelly <stephen.kelly at kdab.com> wrote:
> I also prefer not adding backward source incompatible changes to Qt 4.8. Is
> there any precedent for doing it though? Do we know for sure whether it is
> binary incompatible or not to add an enum value?

AFAIK It's binary compatible, unless adding that value causes the enum
to change size.

> I don't know anything about why creating a minor release is more complex
> than creating a patch release, so I can't comment there.

I imagine the release itself isn't so much the problem (a tarball is a
tarball, after all) as the complexity around then having a 4.8 and 4.9
branch, merging fixes up from 4.8 to 4.9 (and 5.0 first still...) plus
the additional load on CI infra.