[Development] Meeting minutes from Qt Release Team meeting 20.08.2024

[Jani Heikkinen]

Qt 6.8 status

  *   Qt 6.8 Beta3 is released
  *   Qt 6.8 Beta4 preparations are started
     *   The target is to release Qt 6.8 Beta4 during next week
        *   Beta4 should be the last beta release from Qt 6.8
  *   Qt 6.8.0 string freeze will be in effect Tue 27th August
  *   Qt 6.8 RC target is 11th of September
     *   RC blocker list here: https://bugreports.qt.io/issues/?filter=26320
  *   Qt 6.8 API change review is still ongoing, see https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/topic:%22qml_api_review_6.8%22+or+topic:%22api-change-review-6.8%22+status:open
  *   New Qt 6.8 FF exception request for VwWorks input handling: https://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2024-August/045522.html
     *   Decision: It is ok to get this into 6.8 (once it has gone into dev).


Next meeting Tue 27th of August 2024 16:00 CET
br,
Jani Heikkinen
Release Manager
irc log below:
[17:00:30] <jaheikki3_> akseli: alblasch: carewolf: frkleint: lars__: mapaaso_: The-Compiler: thiago: vohi: ping
[17:00:47] <akseli> jaheikki3_: pong
[17:02:38] <jaheikki3_> time to start qt release team meeting
[17:02:44] <jaheikki3_> on agenda today:
[17:02:48] <vohi> jaheikki3_: pong :)
[17:02:53] <jaheikki3_> Qt 6.8 status
[17:03:07] <jaheikki3_> Any additional item to the agenda?
[17:03:14] <thiago> jaheikki3_: pong
[17:04:28] <jaheikki3_> Ok, let's browse through the Qt 6.8 status
[17:04:47] <jaheikki3_> Qt 6.8.0 Beta3 released last week
[17:04:58] <jaheikki3_> beta4 preparations are started
[17:05:13] <jaheikki3_> Target is to release Qt 6.8 Beta4 during next week
[17:05:29] <jaheikki3_> Beta4 should be the last beta release from Qt 6.8.0
[17:06:38] <jaheikki3_> Qt 6.8.0 string freeze will be in effect next Tue 27th August
[17:07:03] <jaheikki3_> and the target is to release Qt 6.8.0 RC 11th of September
[17:07:14] <jaheikki3_> RC blocker list here: https://bugreports.qt.io/issues/?filter=26320
[17:07:28] <jaheikki3_> Qt 6.8 API change review is still ongoing, see https://codereview.qt-project.org/q/topic:%22qml_api_review_6.8%22+or+topic:%22api-change-review-6.8%22+status:open
[17:08:06] <jaheikki3_> We should get critical API review findings in blocker list asap
[17:08:35] <vohi> uh, this blocker list ignores P1s with "fix version 6.8 RC", for instance
[17:09:10] <thiago> ixVersion ~ "6.8.0*"
[17:09:33] <jaheikki3_> vohi: It shouldn't. Or it would if there would be such a version but there isn't; it is 6.8.0 RC
[17:09:39] <carewolf> change it to 6.8* and you get more
[17:09:52] <thiago> it's what's there
[17:10:00] <thiago> I'm seeing 12 issues
[17:10:16] <vohi> ah, right; "6.8.0 RC" is there, but P1's with "fix version 6.8*" gives 37
[17:10:17] <jaheikki3_> carewolf: I tried it but noticed there is quite a much issues having 6.8 in fix versions.
[17:10:37] <carewolf> yeah 37. Not sure how many would be blockers
[17:11:13] <jaheikki3_> And based on discussions with developers they aren't proposing those to be a blocker for 6.8.0 but a plan to fix those in some Qt 6.8.x release
[17:11:36] <jaheikki3_> That's why I use 6.8.0*
[17:11:51] <carewolf> ok
[17:12:10] <thiago> there's a wrong parenthesis set
[17:12:39] <jaheikki3_> thiago: where?
[17:12:40] <thiago> ah, no
[17:12:44] <jaheikki3_> Great :D
[17:12:58] <vohi> I'd rather have more potential blockers than fewer, at this point of the release cycle
[17:13:42] <vohi> it's tedious to discuss them of course, but that's still better than releasing with a bunch of paper-bag issues that we didn't see because we filtered too many things out
[17:15:34] <jaheikki3_> vohi: agree & actually checked those '6.8' ones already. Almos all of those were from fabian or ulf and I checked from them what was their intention and the reply was that it doesn't mean those are blockers for 6.8.0
[17:15:59] <vohi> but then the right thing to do is to clear the fix-version, isn't it?
[17:17:00] <jaheikki3_> vohi: well, they want to use that to indicate the issue is something to be fixed in Qt 6.8.x
[17:17:15] <jaheikki3_> but I agree it is a bit confusing
[17:17:30] <jaheikki3_> I can live with it
[17:18:45] <jaheikki3_> Ok, but back to agenda. We got an Qt 6.8 FF exception request for VwWorks input handling: https://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2024-August/045522.html
[17:18:57] <jaheikki3_> Any opinions for that?
[17:19:48] <carewolf> well it doesnt' affect out API? I guess vxworks wasn't working before?
[17:19:58] <vohi> I think implementing support for functionality that work on other platforms is not a feature; but the change should not introduce risks to other platforms, and the VxWorks specific implementation should be isolated
[17:20:01] <thiago> I don't consider that a new feature
[17:20:10] <thiago> catching up with existing functionality on a currently non-functional port
[17:21:02] <jaheikki3_> Agree
[17:22:17] <vohi> so, ok to get this into 6.8 (once it has gone into dev); the patches might not be as clean as they could be, but generally all the changes are behind "#ifdef Q_OS_VXWORKS" flags or in a separate translation unit
[17:22:37] <jaheikki3_> Yeah
[17:23:00] <vohi> Laszlo has some comments on the second patch in their chain in that respect, his privilege to approve or reject anyway. But no reason to worry about feature freeze.
[17:24:39] <jaheikki3_> I think it was all at this time so let's end this meeting now & have new one tue 27th of August at this same time
[17:24:51] <jaheikki3_> thanks for your participation, bye!
[17:25:14] <vohi> thanks, bye!
[17:25:24] <carewolf> bye

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20240821/8d0f0e2a/attachment-0001.htm>