[Development] Requesting Feature Freeze Exception for C++20 comparison

[Ivan Solovev]

Hi Thiago,

Like I wrote, I generally consider this task done, except for the naming issues.
I have an impression that we will be able to come to an agreement in a reasonable time frame.

However, if you think that there are more issues, let's discuss them and see what we can do to fix them.
I totally agree that we shouldn't merge something that is not 100% ready.

Best regards,
Ivan


------------------------------------

Ivan Solovev

Senior Software Engineer


The Qt Company GmbH
Erich-Thilo-Str. 10
12489 Berlin, Germany

ivan.solovev at qt.io<mailto:ivan.solovev at qt.io>

www.qt.io<https://www.qt.io>


Geschäftsführer: Mika Pälsi,
Juha Varelius, Jouni Lintunen
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin,
Registergericht: Amtsgericht
Charlottenburg, HRB 144331 B

________________________________
From: Development <development-bounces at qt-project.org> on behalf of Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira at intel.com>
Sent: Friday, June 2, 2023 4:47 PM
To: development at qt-project.org <development at qt-project.org>
Subject: Re: [Development] Requesting Feature Freeze Exception for C++20 comparison

On Friday, 2 June 2023 05:18:57 PDT Ivan Solovev via Development wrote:
> I'd like to request a Feature Freeze exception for the C++20 comparison
> task, due to the last-minute discussions about the names of the helper
> functions to be used. This is important because these helper functions are
> intended to be exposed as public API.

Is it important that we do this in 6.6? This API is likely to be very
important for us going forward, so why not take the time and ensure we've
caught all issues?

--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Cloud Software Architect - Intel DCAI Cloud Engineering
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20230604/735d3603/attachment.htm>