[Development] Qt 4.6.5 and 4.7.6 release candidates available

[Thiago Macieira]

On quinta-feira, 21 de fevereiro de 2013 11.53.42, Turunen Tuukka wrote:
> On 21.2.2013 10.07, "Peter Kümmel" <syntheticpp at gmx.net> wrote:
> >On 19.02.2013 20:29, Turunen Tuukka wrote:
> >> We have the packages ready and tested with minor
> >> 
> > > fixes compared to RC1 (21st Dec). If we re-do these
> > > packages it is a significant effort with very limited benefits.
> >
> >It seems to me this already happens before:
> >you first do the packaging and then ask on the list for a go.
> >
> >I would say this is the wrong order, you should first coordinate with
> >the qt-project and then invest Digia's time.
> >
> >This mainly saves YOUR time and budget.
> 
> This is incorrect assumption as we have discussed this before making the
> RC1 - it just took a lot of time due to other release creation activities
> to continue the releasing work, so it seems that some persons (at least
> Thiago) just noticed it now when we are making RC2.

I noticed the email and I was quite happy we were making new releases. I even 
referred to it when I wrote the shmget security fix announcement by looking at 
the version number we were preparing for 4.7.

What I had not noticed was the actual *content* of the branch that the 
releases were coming from. It just seemed to me that the engineers were using 
a different repository to apply small fixes for the package creation (something 
we routinely do).

It didn't occur to me to even think that the releases were not coming from the 
original branch, but instead from one with over 140 cherry-picked commits. 
That's what I'm objecting to now.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20130221/1d735818/attachment.sig>