[Development] Qt branches & proposal how to continue with those

[Lars Knoll]

> On 9 Feb 2018, at 07:52, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler at chello.at> wrote:
> 
> André Pönitz wrote:
>> I think you need to start differentiating between Qt-without-Webengine
>> and QtWebengine.
>> 
>> And maybe "we" should do that, too.
> 
> I would be entirely in favor of separate (more frequent and/or more aligned 
> with Chromium security fixes) QtWebEngine releases. I am already updating 
> QtWebEngine in Fedora on a separate schedule from the core Qt updates (with 
> the intent of delivering security updates faster), so it would not be a 
> problem for me if the releases were entirely separate. And it would surely 
> get security fixes delivered in a more timely manner.

We’ve been discussing this in the past, and most people agreed that releasing QtWebEngine on an independent schedule would be a good thing. But there’s still a couple of things that need sorting out before that can happen, both in the CI and how we create/package our product and SDK as well as in QtWebengine which for example still uses private API of some other parts of Qt.

Cheers,
Lars