[Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

[Marc Mutz]

On Tuesday 16 August 2016 10:06:09 Olivier Goffart wrote:
> On Freitag, 12. August 2016 09:02:08 CEST Thiago Macieira wrote:
[...]
> > I agree with Marc, we should allow fixing bugs besides those that are
> > critical or regressions. Even the regression category will change: once
> > 5.6 is a year old, we'll start making judgement calls that we "had
> > better leave it this way".
> > 
> > I would prefer we do fix bugs that we can, so long as we can reasonably
> > say that they are reasonably safe of causing further issues. At least
> > for the next six months.
> > 
> > We should probably become progressively stricter as the branch becomes
> > older.
> 
> Any rationale for this way?
> I disagree that we should fix non-critical bugs or regression.
> 
> If the bug has been there for several years already and the user could live
> with it, they can continue to work it around unti they upgrade to the newer
> Qt. It can be seen as a feature.
> 
> Our product is the latest version of Qt. LTS means previous versions stay
> supported, not actively developped.

The rationale IMHO is a direct consequence of the target audience of an LTS. 
What's the purpose of an LTS? Why do we jump through hoops to mainain an 
outdated codebase for three year?

Because the LTS is for users who _cannot_ update to newer Qts (for whatever 
reason, dropped platforms just being one of them). Pointing them to a newer Qt 
where their bug is fixed is not going to help them one bit.

Thanks,
Marc

-- 
Marc Mutz <marc.mutz at kdab.com> | Senior Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company
Tel: +49-30-521325470
KDAB - Qt, C++ and OpenGL Experts