[Releasing] ODP: rethinking the branching scheme

Thiago Macieira thiago.macieira at intel.com
Thu Feb 20 21:22:51 CET 2014

Em qui 20 fev 2014, às 19:27:57, Oswald Buddenhagen escreveu:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 09:30:31AM -0800, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > I remember how difficult it was to get KDE developers to update the
> > branch of Qt they were using whenever the minimum required version
> > changed.
> that is hardly related to how hard it is to switch the active branch of
> a checkout. the time to recompile the thing (and possibly to adjust the
> configuration first) is what discourages "consumers" from updating. this
> is not influenced by the branching scheme at all.

You're missing the point.

If you're a KDE developer but not a Qt developer, yet you have your local Qt 
build, as many do, you're probably using the oldest Qt that still works. You 
don't build that often. Update reasons are:

 1) bugfix that you need
 2) feature that you need (usually requires going to a new Qt version)
 3) the minimum required version changed

The difference between 1 & 2 with 3 is that in the first two it's a voluntary 
change. You know you want a new version and you have the time to look for it. 
The latter one is something that gets imposed on you. Things stop building if 
you don't act. So now you've broken your kdecore and kdeui and can't recompile 
until you figure out how to get the newest Qt.

And, yes, getting people to understand how to create the new branch and check 
it out is not easy. The memory isn't fresh, but I do remember this happening a 
lot in #kde-devel as well as in #qt.

All else being equal, it's preferable to put the burden on the smaller group 
and the group who knows Git well. I know all else is not equal, so this is a 
question of balance.

Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

More information about the Releasing mailing list