[Releasing] Meeting minutes: Qt 5.0.2\Qt 5.1 release team meeting 08.04.2013

Fri Apr 19 23:27:52 CEST 2013

(5:33:20 PM) thiago: where do we stand on mingw64?
(5:33:49 PM) ZapB: no strong opinion from me
(5:34:05 PM) fkleint: things is, we don;t have a gdb that can debug it with
Qt Creator yet
(5:34:10 PM) fkleint: 64bit gdb
(5:34:13 PM) fkleint: it is research
(5:34:21 PM) fkleint: (with Python, etc)

I tested just now with the following mingwbuilds x64 GCC 4.8.0 (and GDB
with Python) release:
http://heanet.dl.sourceforge.net/project/mingwbuilds/host-windows/releases/4.8.0/64-bit/threads-win32/seh/x64-4.8.0-release-win32-seh-rev1.7z
using this mingwbuilds Qt/QtCreator:
http://heanet.dl.sourceforge.net/project/mingwbuilds/external-binary-packages/Qt-Builds/x64-Qt-5.0.2%2Bqtcreator-2.7.0-%28gcc-4.8.0-seh-rev1%29.7z
...and debugging worked to a fairly good extent (including pretty
printers), for full disclosure, the initial debugging sessions after
launching QtCreator worked perfectly, but in subsequent sessions, the
breakpoints were all messed up. I suspect this has more to do with
QtCreator than GDB though and a restart always allowed another session.

Best regards,

Ray.

On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 6:01 PM, Salovaara Akseli <
Akseli.Salovaara at digia.com> wrote:

>  Hi,****
>
> ** **
>
> Meeting minutes from Qt 5.0.2\Qt 5.1 release team meeting 08.04.2013****
>
> - Qt 5.0.2 QtBase changes file updated. Delayed due to problems CI &
> Gitorious. Proceeding with release without additional meetings. (Update
> from 10th April: Qt 5.0.2 released)****
>
> - Criteria for releasing Qt 5.1 Beta1: "Most of the feedback that we
> expected to receive regarding the API has been received and acted upon." (
> http://www.macieira.org/blog/2012/01/qt-temperatures-drop-from-january-to-june/)
> which means we wait a few weeks for the feedback, then we check what is
> needed to do.****
>
> - Target for Qt 5.1.0 Windows installers: msvc2010, msvc2010-opengl,
> msvc2012-x64, msvc2012-x64-opengl (new installer), MinGW (with update to
> 4.8-dw)****
>
> - Topic: "Linux binaries should be compiled with the oldest acceptable
> distribution" (to be decided on Mailing list)****
>
> - Topic: Possibly changing Mac building back to macx-g++ or to accept the
> elevate of the minimum deploy version to Mac 10.7 (to be decided on Mailing
> list)****
>
> - Next meeting on Monday 22.04.2013 16:00 CET.****
>
> ** **
>
> The IRC log below.****
>
> ** **
>
> Br,****
>
> Akseli****
>
> ** **
>
> (5:00:40 PM) *akseli1: *iieklund: kkoehne: ramotyka: sahumada|home:
> thiago: ZapB: fkleint: tronical: ping
> (5:00:56 PM) *ZapB: *akseli1: pong
> (5:01:05 PM) *fkleint: *akseli1: pong
> (5:01:06 PM) *sletta left the room (quit: Quit: sletta).*
> (5:02:08 PM) *thiago: *akseli1: pong
> (5:03:18 PM) *kkoehne: *akseli1: pong
> (5:03:18 PM) *akseli1: *Time to start Qt 5.0.2\5.1 release meeting
> (5:03:36 PM) *akseli1: *On agenda today:
> (5:03:36 PM) *akseli1: *Qt 5.0.2 release status
> (5:03:37 PM) *akseli1: *Qt 5.1: possible extensions to installer
> platforms (e.g. MinGW 64bit)
> (5:03:37 PM) *akseli1: *Qt 5.1: Topic: Linux binaries should be compiled
> with the oldest acceptable distribution (oldest gcc, oldest glibc).
> (5:04:00 PM) *akseli1: *any additional items in mind (except next
> meeting)?
> (5:04:01 PM) *sahumada|home: *akseli1: pong
> (5:04:41 PM) ZapB: criteria for releasing beta1?
> (5:05:22 PM) *janih [~Jani at dsl-olubrasgw1-50dcae-101.dhcp.inet.fi]
> entered the room.*
> (5:05:23 PM) *akseli1: *ZapB: valid point
> (5:06:29 PM) *akseli1: *Beta1 release criteria after Qt 5.0.2 release
> status
> (5:06:50 PM) *akseli1: *so starting from Qt 5.0.2 release status...
> (5:07:46 PM) *akseli1: *qtbase changes file is now done and trying to
> have new installers tomorrow
> (5:08:04 PM) *akseli1: *proceeding to release after that
> (5:08:42 PM) *akseli1: *naturally testing installers first but no
> surprises expected
> (5:08:44 PM) sahumada|home: still in CI though
> (5:08:51 PM) sahumada|home: the qtbase change file, that is
> (5:09:46 PM) thiago: the CI was stuck during the whole weekend and then
> gitorious was failing
> (5:10:31 PM) thiago: otherwise, I guess no surprises. Sanity check and
> release, no new meeting required.
> (5:11:00 PM) *akseli1: *that was the case and I agree, no new meeting
> required
> (5:11:09 PM) *akseli1: *then Criteria for releasing Beta1
> (5:11:26 PM) thiago:
> http://www.macieira.org/blog/2012/01/qt-temperatures-drop-from-january-to-june/
> (5:11:28 PM) ZapB: is there a jira task created for 5.1 beta1?
> (5:11:38 PM) thiago: the definition of beta is there
> (5:11:59 PM) thiago: "Most of the feedback that we expected to receive
> regarding the API has been received and acted upon. "
> (5:14:16 PM) ZapB: i find that hard to quantify but I see what you mean ;)
> (5:14:46 PM) thiago: it means we wait a few weeks for the feedback, then
> we check what is needed to do
> (5:15:01 PM) thiago: in the mean time, we make sure that it compiles and
> that the installers work
> (5:15:16 PM) ZapB: yep
> (5:16:43 PM) sahumada|home: what about documentation and examples .. does
> it make sense to have examples for qtx11extras.git ?
> (5:17:50 PM) thiago: yes
> (5:17:58 PM) thiago: technically, that was required for the alpha
> (5:20:41 PM) *akseli1: *any other comments from beta1 criteria? do all
> agree?
> (5:21:26 PM) ZapB: fine by me
> (5:21:31 PM) thiago: in terms of P1s: we should have P1s assigned for the
> 5.1.0 tag in JIRA
> (5:21:49 PM) thiago: don't create P1 or P0 for the beta version, unless
> it *must* be fixed in that release
> (5:21:54 PM) thiago: such as the API changes
> (5:22:43 PM) *anshaw left the room (quit: Ping timeout: 264 seconds).*
> (5:23:43 PM) *sletta [~sletta at 145.194.251.212.customer.cdi.no] entered
> the room.*
> (5:25:00 PM) *sletta left the room (quit: Client Quit).*
> (5:25:11 PM) thiago: I guess that was uncontroversial
> (5:25:17 PM) thiago: next topic?
> (5:25:22 PM) *akseli1: *no one is saying anything against criteria so i
> hope that is appoved then
> (5:25:34 PM) *akseli1: *5.1: possible extensions to installer platforms
> (e.g. MinGW 64bit)
> (5:25:57 PM) *akseli1: *we are aiming to provide android installers
> already
> (5:26:20 PM) *akseli1: *there have been earlier discussion about mingw64
> installers
> (5:26:26 PM) ZapB: I would like to see more Desktop OpenGL builds on
> windows and we need to fix webkit2 support with desktop GL
> (5:26:38 PM) thiago: android is preliminary, so let's make sure that it
> never stops a release
> (5:26:52 PM) fkleint: ZapB: +1, tronical?
> (5:26:59 PM) thiago: what are the windows builds we currently have and
> what are we proposing?
> (5:27:21 PM) fkleint: we have MSV2010 32/64 and MSVC2012 64
> (5:27:25 PM) *akseli1: *currently vs2010, vs2010 opengl desktop, vs2012,
> mingw
> (5:27:29 PM) fkleint: OpenGL and ANGLE,
> (5:27:39 PM) fkleint: and OpenGL does not have WebKit 2 ;-/ ..what was
> the task..
> (5:27:43 PM) fkleint: QTBUG-30290
> (5:28:02 PM) *akseli1: *i would see more important to fix webkit2 to
> opengl than provide additional installers
> (5:28:20 PM) fkleint: tronical: Can you comment? - jturcotte said sth not
> before 5.2 due to some merging thing?,. maybe it can be prioritized?
> (5:28:42 PM) fkleint: Not in it seems.
> (5:29:07 PM) thiago: I didn't know we had 2010 64-bit
> (5:29:20 PM) *akseli1: *actually we don't ship 2010 64bit
> (5:29:27 PM) fkleint: yes, true
> (5:29:32 PM) fkleint: MSVC2012 only
> (5:29:53 PM) *akseli1: *and i would propose that on 5.1.0 we stay with
> 5.0.2 installers
> (5:29:59 PM) *tmcguire left the room (quit: Quit: Bye!).*
> (5:30:13 PM) thiago: we need to replace the mingw one with gcc 4.8
> (5:30:28 PM) thiago: which ones are angle and which ones are opengl?
> (5:31:17 PM) *akseli1: *vs2010 is provided with angle & opengl, rest of
> them are angle
> (5:31:26 PM) fkleint: (32bit),yes
> (5:31:54 PM) thiago: ZapB: do we need to change which ones are opengl?
> (5:32:00 PM) thiago: should we favour vs2012?
> (5:32:17 PM) ZapB: thiago: I would like to see at least one 64-bit OpenGL
> build
> (5:32:26 PM) ZapB: 2010vs2012 is debateable.
> (5:32:35 PM) thiago: which one would you prefer? vs2012 or mingw64?
> (5:32:42 PM) ZapB: vs2012
> (5:32:47 PM) thiago: ok
> (5:32:55 PM) thiago: so recommendation 1: add vs2012-x64-opengl
> (5:33:01 PM) fkleint: +1
> (5:33:08 PM) ZapB: +2
> (5:33:20 PM) thiago: where do we stand on mingw64?
> (5:33:49 PM) ZapB: no strong opinion from me
> (5:34:05 PM) fkleint: things is, we don;t have a gdb that can debug it
> with Qt Creator yet
> (5:34:10 PM) fkleint: 64bit gdb
> (5:34:13 PM) fkleint: it is research
> (5:34:21 PM) fkleint: (with Python, etc)
> (5:34:45 PM) thiago: so skip it for now
> (5:34:52 PM) fkleint: yes, I'd say
> (5:34:53 PM) thiago: we can always change our minds when the situation
> there improves
> (5:34:59 PM) fkleint: yep
> (5:35:19 PM) kkoehne: (Me has hopes that it's already improved with 4.8,
> but haven't checked)
> (5:35:39 PM) thiago: so the target 5.1.0 installers are: msvc2010,
> msvc2010-opengl, msvc2012-x64, msvc2012-x64-opengl, mingw (4.8-dw)
> (5:35:44 PM) fkleint: kkoehne: We need to compile a gdb, davschulz is
> looking into it
> (5:35:52 PM) thiago: did I miss any?
> (5:36:37 PM) *akseli1: *as msvc2012-x64-opengl is new candidate for
> installers it may not stop release
> (5:36:51 PM) thiago: not the beta, agreed
> (5:37:12 PM) thiago: but we should make the effort. I'd rather not add
> new installers after the beta.
> (5:38:24 PM) thiago: anything else on windows installers?
> (5:39:00 PM) *ramotyka__ [~ramotyka_ at ti0046a380-dhcp0228.bb.online.no]
> entered the room.*
> (5:39:07 PM) thiago: I'll take that as a no
> (5:39:09 PM) *akseli1: *don't think so ... a bit concerned the effort
> required to msvc2012-x64-opengl
> (5:39:18 PM) thiago: how so?
> (5:39:51 PM) *akseli1: *additional installer package especially with
> compiler having problems with webkit already
> (5:40:10 PM) *akseli1: *couln't find the bug id but referred to vs2012.2
> update
> (5:41:09 PM) thiago: msvc2012-x64 is the only build I make
> (5:41:14 PM) thiago: I haven't had problems with it
> (5:41:24 PM) fkleint: The compiler bug affecting assistant/webkit has
> been worked aroundf
> (5:41:26 PM) ZapB: i've not tried the 2012.2 update yet but we only need
> to build webkit if we can make it work
> (5:41:51 PM) *akseli1: *well, we can have try with 2012 x64-opengl
> (5:41:53 PM) fkleint: and hopefully the update does not break things again
> (5:42:19 PM) *akseli1: *no other new installers then at this point i think
> (5:42:40 PM) *akseli1: *moving on ... Qt 5.1: Topic: Linux binaries
> should be compiled with the oldest acceptable distribution (oldest gcc,
> oldest glibc).
> (5:43:10 PM) *akseli1: *qt project have defined Ubuntu 11.10 as reference
> installer
> (5:43:45 PM) *akseli1: *doesn't this change actually change reference
> installer definition?
> (5:44:18 PM) *kkoehne: *akseli1: What do you mean by that?
> (5:45:18 PM) thiago: any binaries we build for Linux need to be built on
> the oldest target installation
> (5:45:22 PM) thiago: reference doesn't mean anything
> (5:45:23 PM) kkoehne: Question for me is how many people we actually
> leave out by using Ubuntu 11.10 , and whether all required & recommended
> libs are actually available for Debian. Think of xcb ...
> (5:45:33 PM) *akseli1: *meaning we would end up compiling release builds
> & packages with something elese than Ubuntu 11.10
> (5:46:11 PM) thiago: Debian will have all of that. Maintaining it should
> be no more difficult than Ubuntu. And we can always ask svuorela for help.
> (5:47:54 PM) *akseli1: *i think i don't see the whole picture on this
> issue and would propose that this conversation to be taken to mailing list.
> could that be possible?
> (5:48:15 PM) thiago: fair enough
> (5:48:37 PM) *akseli1: *thiago: you will write email about this?
> (5:48:41 PM) thiago: yes
> (5:48:45 PM) *akseli1: *thank you
> (5:48:51 PM) thiago: quick question on mac installers: we're building
> macx-g++, right?
> (5:50:06 PM) *akseli1: *i cant remember, kkoehne: sahumada|home ^
> (5:51:04 PM) sahumada|home: we are uisng -platform macx-clang .. if
> that's what you mean
> (5:51:10 PM) thiago: yes
> (5:51:30 PM) thiago: there are a few pending commits that would elevate
> the minimum deploy version to 10.7 for that mkspec
> (5:51:51 PM) thiago: we need to discuss going back to macx-g++ or to
> accept the new minimum deploy
> (5:52:23 PM) thiago: it is also a binary-incompatible change since it
> links to libc++ instead of libstdc++
> (5:52:34 PM) thiago: I guess on the ML
> (5:52:51 PM) *akseli1: *mailing list, yes please
> (5:53:36 PM) *akseli1: *any other topics anyone?
> (5:54:01 PM) *akseli1: *would next monday 16:00 CET be alright for the
> next meeting?
> (5:54:11 PM) thiago: I don't think we need a meeting next week
> (5:54:38 PM) thiago: 5.0.2 doesn't require a meeting; 5.1 requires
> feedback
> (5:54:43 PM) thiago: so should we do it in two weeks?
> (5:54:57 PM) ZapB: seems reasonable
> (5:55:07 PM) fkleint: yes
> (5:55:57 PM) *akseli1: *you have a point, two weeks then
> (5:56:38 PM) *akseli1: *and Monday 16:00 CET
> (5:56:53 PM) *akseli1: *thank you all for the meeting
> (5:58:08 PM) ZapB: thanks
> (5:58:13 PM) fkleint: thx****
>
> _______________________________________________
> Releasing mailing list
> Releasing at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/releasing
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/releasing/attachments/20130419/59d157d4/attachment.html>