[Development] Qbs development

Tuukka Turunen tuukka.turunen at qt.io
Wed Sep 15 14:05:27 CEST 2021


Let’s look into what kind of additional systems we could arrange that helps development of Qbs. Just now everyone is busy getting Qt 6.2 and QDS 2.2 successfully released, but we should be able to look into this latest in the beginning of October.



From: Development <development-bounces at qt-project.org> on behalf of Denis Shienkov <denis.shienkov at gmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, 15. September 2021 at 13.59
To: development at qt-project.org <development at qt-project.org>
Subject: Re: [Development] Qbs development

Hi Lars, Tuukka,

> I also would very much like you to stay here.

AFAIK, a main issue here not about of maintenance behaviour. A main issue in the access right on the Qbs project. F.e. right now it is hard to maintenance the CI integration with the GitHub, to generate the pre-compiled releases and other stuff (maybe Ivan can explain a betetr).

Also, a main issue is for the CI for the bare-metal toolchains, where we need to use the self-runners instead of Docker containers (there are impossible to use the dockers).

So, if you want to be Qbs stayed in the QtCompany infrastructure, then you need to help us a bit, e.g. provide some separate server resources (e.g. two VMs with Linux && Windows OS installed) where we can setup all required stuff to work with CI. ;)

Because right now I use own host PC as self-runner for CI, what is very bad and non-stable approach.  ;)

BR, Denis
15.09.2021 13:32, Lars Knoll пишет:
Hi Ivan,

I also would very much like you to stay here. QBS is great project and something that came out of the Qt work and still has very strong ties to it.

I am fully with Tuukka that what we want is to make it a good experience and easy for people to work here in the project. Blocking other peoples work is certainly not in line with this.

The governance model has the ’no confidence’ clause for a reason and if you have tried other means before, I can and will of course arrange such a vote.


On 15 Sep 2021, at 12:18, Tuukka Turunen <tuukka.turunen at qt.io<mailto:tuukka.turunen at qt.io>> wrote:


I would not like Qbs development to move away from the Qt project. It is very unfortunate that you have had bad experience and misbehavior from one approver. We want to constantly improve the experience of working within the Qt project and naturally this kind of incidents are not doing that. Therefore, it is very good that you have raised the topic in the mailing list, as many were not aware of it earlier. On the positive side, I do not think there is any general hostility towards Qbs within the Qt projects – on the contrary I can see a lot of good co-operation.



From: Development <development-bounces at qt-project.org<mailto:development-bounces at qt-project.org>> on behalf of Иван Комиссаров <abbapoh at gmail.com<mailto:abbapoh at gmail.com>>
Date: Tuesday, 14. September 2021 at 20.49
To: Lars Knoll <lars.knoll at qt.io<mailto:lars.knoll at qt.io>>
Cc: Qt development mailing list <development at qt-project.org<mailto:development at qt-project.org>>
Subject: Re: [Development] Qbs development
Thanks for the response.
I can provide a third option - we can move Qbs out of the Qt Governance Model by moving to GitHub. I have raised this topic on our Discord server and the community overall seems positive - there were several votes for the migration and no votes against. This migration might be healthy to Qbs as a lot of newcomers are not familiar with Gerrit but familiar with GitHub and it’s pull-request model.
Also, it will clearly separate who can approve/reject patches to Qbs and to the rest of Qt world.
If there are no objections, I will create an INFRA issue about the migration - it should not be very hard to do.


14 сент. 2021 г., в 17:33, Lars Knoll <lars.knoll at qt.io<mailto:lars.knoll at qt.io>> написал(а):

Let’s also take up the formal part of the request.

On 13 Sep 2021, at 22:59, Иван Комиссаров <abbapoh at gmail.com<mailto:abbapoh at gmail.com>> wrote:
Also, some actions might be taken to prevent from happening in the future - if technically possible, I’d like to request the revoke of his approver rights on the Qbs project as per this part of the Qt Governance Model:
«In extreme circumstances Approver privileges can be revoked by a vote of no confidence, proposed by an existing Approver or Maintainer and arranged by the Chief Maintainer. Privilege revocation requires a two-thirds majority vote of those Approvers and Maintainers who express an opinion.» [3]

On 14 Sep 2021, at 12:34, Richard Weickelt <richard at weickelt.de<mailto:richard at weickelt.de>> wrote:
The question is whether this is an abuse of approver rights.

This is a relevant question for the Qt project. Any person with approver
rights has the ability to cause a production stop. Ivan is asking for help
in this particular case and I am seconding his request.

Ivan and Richard, do I understand you correctly that you’d like to have a formal vote of no confidence according to QUIP-2? Please understand that this clause is meant as a last resort, when other solutions have failed.

We will also need to consider that the Qt Governance Model only defines global Approver rights for all of the Qt Project. The request was however limited to QBS, so we would need to find a way to handle this. I can only see two options there, either we start extending our governance model here (can be done with a lazy consensus on that extension), or change the scope to the whole project having much more severe implications.

Ossi, I (and probably others on this mailing list) would also like to hear your view on this. As I stated in my previous mail in this thread, I strongly believe, that the people doing the actual work decide on the direction and individual changes. The Governance model states the same, the maintainer takes the decision in case no agreement can be reached. As far as I can see, your actions are conflicting with this.

Thank you,


Development mailing list

Development at qt-project.org<mailto:Development at qt-project.org>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20210915/cae76e3e/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Development mailing list