[Development] [Releasing] HEADS UP: Qt 5.4 feature freeze - branch created

[Heikkinen Jani]

Hi,

Friday's 12:00 CET deadline shouldn't be any surprise for anyone: It was agreed in release team meeting before summer vacations (http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/releasing/2014-June/001783.html) & I have sent some notifications about that after that, latest one less than two weeks ago (http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2014-July/017780.html).

But let's move on as already said earlier. What is still missing from 5.4 branch for Alpha release? According to plans we should have Alpha this Thursday so we need to get all needed things in really soon to be able to keep the schedule

Br,
Jani

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: development-bounces+jani.heikkinen=digia.com at qt-project.org
>>[mailto:development-bounces+jani.heikkinen=digia.com at qt-project.org]
>>On Behalf Of Knoll Lars
>>Sent: 11. elokuuta 2014 10:23
>>To: Thiago Macieira; development at qt-project.org
>>Subject: Re: [Development] [Releasing] HEADS UP: Qt 5.4 feature freeze -
>>branch created
>>
>>
>>On 11/08/14 03:10, "Thiago Macieira" <thiago.macieira at intel.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Monday 11 August 2014 00:09:59 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
>>>> > You're missing the obvious: there was a change and people were not
>>>>ready
>>>> > for it.
>>>>
>>>> that's hardly an argument, given that everybody who paid any attention
>>>> at all knew that it would be *somehow* quite different (due to the
>>>> different branching model).
>>>
>>>That's the entire argument. You can't dismiss it. Of course it would be
>>>different, but without communication explaining how it would happen,
>>>everyone
>>>assumed it would be close to the previous procedures.
>>>
>>>But let's move on. What's done is done and we've learnt the lesson:
>>>communication.
>>
>>Yes. I am not saying it was wrong neither. It was simply a small surprise
>>as it happened differently before. Yes, I could have thought that the new
>>branching scheme will make this simpler, but often you tend to forget
>>about it.
>>
>>In any case, the branching seems to have gone with a lot issues than
>>before, as we hoped it would be. So the new branching scheme seems to be
>>improving things :)
>>
>>Cheers,
>>Lars
>>
>>>
>>>> > Which, again, is a change from previous procedure. In past times, as a
>>>> > member of the release team, I had the right to stage things past the
>>>> > feature freeze, to get things integrated that failed due to unrelated
>>>>CI
>>>> > failures and commits that were granted exception from the freeze.
>>>>
>>>> i'll remind you that you did this *after* i explicitly told you not to
>>>> "help" without prior coordination with me. there is a line between
>>>> "being taken by surprise" and "being kinda obstinate".
>>>
>>>I did ping you on IRC for coordination. Since you didn't reply, I
>>>proceeded
>>>according to previous rules. (No, it was not after midnight in your
>>>timezone)
>>>
>>>> > I can't get the CI to tell me if there's anything wrong. Even if I
>>>> > stage now (which I have done), it will run on Monday morning, at a
>>>> > time at which I'll be busy packing. I'll get home in Portland on
>>>> > Tuesday evening UTC, close to midnight Wednesday. That'll be my first
>>>> > chance to see if any of my integrations failed due to CI issues.
>>>>
>>>> and why would any of that be bad? it's not like anything is on fire. you
>>>> can do other things in the mean time, which you totally do have enough
>>>> to choose from.
>>>
>>>It's time lost. Right now, I am 5 hours behind Central European timezone
>>>and I
>>>have some 8-9 hours of overlap with possible reviewers. Once I get back
>>>home,
>>>the overlap reduces to 5-6 hours, minus the time I have to spend doing
>>>the
>>>rest of $DAYJOB. That means I'll have about 4-6 hours for Qt throughout
>>>the
>>>rest of this week.
>>>
>>>--
>>>Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
>>>  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Development mailing list
>>>Development at qt-project.org
>>>http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Development mailing list
>>Development at qt-project.org
>>http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development