[Development] Where and how does Qt define which platforms are supported?

[André Pönitz]

On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:40:16PM +0100, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On quarta-feira, 23 de outubro de 2013 22:30:28, André Pönitz wrote:
> > One point that seems to be missing in these considerations is a clearly
> > communicated distinction between "actual state" and "intended state".
> > 
> > The use of "Tier" currently sems to close to "actual" state, and "reference
> > platform" close to "intended" state. Unfortunately, that's not fully
> > aligned with the expectations of an unsuspecting observer, at least not
> > with mine, as a non-native speaker.
> 
> There's is no intended state.
>
> There are platforms that the Qt project requires contributors to work on, 
> which are defined per module.
> 
> Each platform will receive a tier "certification" at release time, based on 
> what testing gets done at that release time.

So "Tier" is "actual" state (which I personally find a rather odd association,
but certainly "good enough" if stated clearly in prominent places)

And half of the problem is unsolved. From a Qt user's perspective there's
quite some difference between "Tier 2 - happens to work now, but is left to
rot and die" and "Tier 2 - intended to be Tier 1, but fumbled at the
latest release" when trying to judge whether Qt will be suitable for his product.

> The Tier levels are for users to know what they can rely on: does Qt work on 
> that platform and can I count on it to continue working in the medium term.

This "medium term" perspective contradicts what you stated above about "at
release time". 

As I said, "actual" and "intended" should be separated, and communicated.
_Clearly_.

Andre'