[Development] [Releasing] Including QTimeZone in Qt 5.1

[Oswald Buddenhagen]

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 04:12:07PM -0800, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On terça-feira, 26 de fevereiro de 2013 22.42.31, John Layt wrote:
> > On Wednesday 20 Feb 2013 16:16:55 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > > For 12 commits, I'd just submit straight to dev.
> > 
> > Would you prefer it squashed to one big commit, or keep the platform
> > backends separate commits?
> 
> I prefer separate commits, but Ossi generally disagrees.
> 
in this broadness, this statement most certainly contradicts reality. ;)

there are two question clusters to answer here:
- does it actually buy us anything to split this up?
  - are these changes logically distinct? (i'm not convinced)
  - is it easier to review? (not really - the parts are pretty well
    separated)
  - is undoing these additions separately a plausible scenario?
    (unlikely)
- does it hurt to split it up?
  - is the frontend even testable without a backend? if not, then adding
    at least one halfways generic backend together with the frontend
    would be required to satisfy strict atomicity. you could cheat and
    make the tests QSKIP if no backend is found, but you shouldn't do that
    if running without backends is not actually a supported case.