[Releasing] Should we make Qt 5.3.0-1 to fix one Android bug?

Thiago Macieira thiago.macieira at intel.com
Fri May 23 17:48:05 CEST 2014

Em sex 23 maio 2014, às 12:51:40, Turunen Tuukka escreveu:
> >> then bite the bullet and call it 5.3.1.
> >
> >that's "a lot" of work (from the packaging perspective)

I really don't see how changing the version one way is a lot more work than 
changing the version number the other way. The version number is changing in 
the sources *anyway*. 

Yes, it is. Whatever we release now, whenever we release, MUST have a different 
version number. Otherwise, we won't be able to tell Imagine someone reports a 
crash-on-startup bug on Android in a few months, how will we know whether 
they're using the original 5.3.0 or the patched version?

And yes, we have to rebuild everything for any new release, otherwise we'll 
get users asking "why is there no 5.3.1/ for Windows?".

> And it is also not good idea from user¹s viewpoint as it causes quite some
> hassle in the messaging.

Agreed. Any release we put out now will raise questions. A new release within 
a week of the previous is called a "brown paper bag release" (because you have 
to put a brown paper bag over your head in shame for the previous release). 
And as Tuukka said, this release seems to be quite solid, so it does not 
qualify as brown paper bag. So I think that putting out a release right now 
will send the wrong message.

(Note, there seems to be an important regression on OS X as well, see 

In any case, if this is done, please don't use the dash to indicate a new 
version. The correct is 5.3.1, but failing that, use or (following the 
last 3.3 releases), 5.3.0b.

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

More information about the Releasing mailing list