From jani.heikkinen at qt.io  Tue Aug  1 08:55:28 2017
From: jani.heikkinen at qt.io (Jani Heikkinen)
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2017 06:55:28 +0000
Subject: [Releasing] Qt 5.10 schedule etc
Message-ID: <HE1PR02MB3132DFFBCCFE0E6C6061CC579DB30@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>

Hi all,
Kindly reminder: According to schedule we should have Qt 5.10 feature freeze after a week, see https://wiki.qt.io/Qt_5.10_Release. So it is time to do remaining finalizations to 5.10 new features now and focus to bug fixing after that. Please fill new features page now as well (https://wiki.qt.io/New_Features_in_Qt_5.10); it seems to be quite empty at the moment.

And we should start soft branching today. But as Frederik informed yesterday we are planning to do some changes to coin infrastructure during this week (see http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2017-July/030596.html). So let's postpone the start of soft branching a bit and do it after coin infra changes are in & working. Doing one more branch just now makes these coin changes more difficult & most probably causes more delays in the future. 

So the plan with 5.10 is following:
1. Let's keep the agreed ff as it is (8.8.2017)
2. Get first 5.10 binary snapshot from 'dev' out as soon as possible
3. Start soft branching (from 'dev' to '5.10') immediately after coin infra changes are in & every branch ('5.6', 5.9' & 'dev') is working ok with infra changes
4. Finalize branching (~ a week from soft branching)
5. Release Qt 5.10 alpha as soon as possible after the branching. We should be able to do this quite quickly; As usual Alpha will be src packages only and we can already create needed ones from 'dev'.
   * Most probably we should be able to deliver binary snapshot with alpha as well. If not just at same time then quite soon after the release...

br,
Jani




From jani.heikkinen at qt.io  Wed Aug  2 08:09:35 2017
From: jani.heikkinen at qt.io (Jani Heikkinen)
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2017 06:09:35 +0000
Subject: [Releasing] Meeting minutes from Qt Release Team meeting 01.08.2017
Message-ID: <HE1PR02MB3132B489DAD4C8AA39EEEF4E9DB00@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>

Meeting minutes from Qt Release Team meeting 1st August 2017

Qt 5.10 status:
- No snapshot for testing yet
   * Src package creation from qt5 build already working
   * Work ongoing to get first binary snapshot available
- Feature freeze 8.8.2017
- Start branching postponed until ci infra changes (http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2017-July/030596.html) are in & working OK in every branch
   * This shouldn't cause any delay to alpha release because we can already now produce src packages for it

Qt 5.6.3
- Qt5.git integration succeed Tuesday morning
- Unfortunately no binary snapshot for testing yet :(
   * Work ongoing, target to get first one available as soon as possible

Qt 5.9.2
- New qt5.git integration ongoing
- Target to start creating first binary snapshot after qt5.git integration succeed
- We are still targeting to get 5.9.2 out during August
   * But lets see this after we get first snapshot out

br,
Jani

irc log below:
[17:00:24] <jaheikki3> akseli: iieklund: thiago: fkleint: ZapB: tronical:vladimirM: aholza: peter-h: mapaaso: ankokko: fkleint: carewolf: fregl:ablasche:ping
[17:00:37] <ankokko_> jaheikki3: pong
[17:01:38] <jaheikki3> time to start qt release team meeting
[17:01:44] <jaheikki3> on agenda today:
[17:01:55] <jaheikki3> Qt 5.10 status
[17:02:04] <jaheikki3> Qt 5.6.3 status
[17:02:10] <jaheikki3> Qt 5.9.2 status
[17:02:25] <jaheikki3> Any additional items to the agenda?
[17:04:09] <jaheikki3> ok,lets browse through release statuses quickly. starting from 5.10
[17:05:00] <jaheikki3> Unfortunately no binary snapshot for testing yet
[17:05:23] <jaheikki3> qt5.git integration succeed last Saturday, new one ongoing
[17:05:46] <jaheikki3> preparations for first binary snapshot ongoing
[17:07:26] <jaheikki3> According to schedule (https://wiki.qt.io/Qt_5.10_Release) we should start soft branching today. But as I wrote (http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2017-August/030622.html) lets postpone branching until ci infra changes are done & working OK in every branch
[17:08:03] <jaheikki3> But lets still keep the FF schedule as it is (8.8.2017)
[17:10:07] <jaheikki3> And we should be able to keep the Alpha schedule even we need to delay the branching a bit; we can already produce proper src packages from qt5.git integrations so we should be able to release Alpha quite quickly after branching
[17:10:28] <jaheikki3> Any comments or questions?
[17:11:05] <ankokko_> that plan sounds good to me
[17:11:28] <jaheikki3> Ok, then Qt 5.6.3 status
[17:11:39] <jaheikki3> No binary snapshot for Qt 5.6.3 yet :(
[17:12:01] <jaheikki3> work ongoing, hoping we can get first one out as soon as possible
[17:12:49] <jaheikki3> qt5.git integration succeed today
[17:13:41] <jaheikki3> and building enterprise stuff for it ongoing
[17:14:06] <jaheikki3> target is to start export & packaging tomorrow, lets see if all that goes OK
[17:14:25] <jaheikki3> Any comments or questions?
[17:15:53] <fregl> jaheikki3: sounds good :) note that there is trouble with the (current/old) CI right now
[17:16:23] <fregl> jaheikki3: if you have anyone nearby, poke them that no Ubuntu 16.04 agents seem to be willing to work today ;)
[17:16:56] <jaheikki3> fregl: Already at home ;)
[17:17:23] <fregl> jaheikki3: seems like everyone is :(
[17:17:25] <jaheikki3> fregl: but I can send SMS to tony to see if he can help
[17:17:46] <fregl> that's up to  you guys, but it's currently blocking everything afaict
[17:19:10] <jaheikki3> Just sent an SMS
[17:19:26] <jaheikki3> Ok, then Qt 5.9.2 status
[17:19:43] <jaheikki3> qt5.git integration ongoing as well
[17:20:05] <jaheikki3> When it succeed we start preparations for first binary snapshot
[17:20:40] <fregl> :)
[17:21:00] <jaheikki3> There shouldn't be that much changes since Qt 5.9.1 release so we should be able to get Qt 5.9.2 out quite soon but let's see that after we have first snapshot for testing
[17:21:56] <jaheikki3> We are still targeting to get it out during August but let's see if that will happen.
[17:22:22] <fregl> what should prevent us from getting it out? it is already due.
[17:22:22] <jaheikki3> Any comments or questions?
[17:22:51] <fregl> apart from the infrastructure maybe making trouble, I see no reason not to get it out asap
[17:23:56] <jaheikki3> yeah
[17:24:23] <jaheikki3> I think this was all at this time. Let's end this meeting now & have new one next tue as planned
[17:24:37] <jaheikki3> Thanks for you participation. Bye!
[17:25:20] <ankokko_> bye
[17:25:28] <fregl> thanks!






From jani.heikkinen at qt.io  Tue Aug  8 10:41:02 2017
From: jani.heikkinen at qt.io (Jani Heikkinen)
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2017 08:41:02 +0000
Subject: [Releasing] Qt 5.10 schedule etc
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR02MB3132DFFBCCFE0E6C6061CC579DB30@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
References: <HE1PR02MB3132DFFBCCFE0E6C6061CC579DB30@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <VI1PR02MB3133A14A246A2F6772E63DB89D8A0@VI1PR02MB3133.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>

Hi all,

We should have FF & branching today. Unfortunately we are still fighting with some issues in qt5.git integration in 'dev' . That's why we haven't been able to start soft branching yet :( But that doesn't mean we will officially delay the FF ;)

So let's freeze new features for Qt 5.10 today as planned. Please don't put any new features in for 5.10 anymore. We will start soft branching immediately when issues with qt5.git integration in' dev' are solved. And we will finalize branching ~ after a week from that date when soft branching starts. So there will be still enough time to get changes in which are currently suffering these issues in dev. 

br,
Jani


________________________________________
From: Development <development-bounces+jani.heikkinen=qt.io at qt-project.org> on behalf of Jani Heikkinen <jani.heikkinen at qt.io>
Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2017 9:55 AM
To: development at qt-project.org
Cc: releasing at qt-project.org
Subject: [Development] Qt 5.10 schedule etc

Hi all,
Kindly reminder: According to schedule we should have Qt 5.10 feature freeze after a week, see https://wiki.qt.io/Qt_5.10_Release. So it is time to do remaining finalizations to 5.10 new features now and focus to bug fixing after that. Please fill new features page now as well (https://wiki.qt.io/New_Features_in_Qt_5.10); it seems to be quite empty at the moment.

And we should start soft branching today. But as Frederik informed yesterday we are planning to do some changes to coin infrastructure during this week (see http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2017-July/030596.html). So let's postpone the start of soft branching a bit and do it after coin infra changes are in & working. Doing one more branch just now makes these coin changes more difficult & most probably causes more delays in the future.

So the plan with 5.10 is following:
1. Let's keep the agreed ff as it is (8.8.2017)
2. Get first 5.10 binary snapshot from 'dev' out as soon as possible
3. Start soft branching (from 'dev' to '5.10') immediately after coin infra changes are in & every branch ('5.6', 5.9' & 'dev') is working ok with infra changes
4. Finalize branching (~ a week from soft branching)
5. Release Qt 5.10 alpha as soon as possible after the branching. We should be able to do this quite quickly; As usual Alpha will be src packages only and we can already create needed ones from 'dev'.
   * Most probably we should be able to deliver binary snapshot with alpha as well. If not just at same time then quite soon after the release...

br,
Jani


_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
Development at qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development


From jani.heikkinen at qt.io  Wed Aug 16 08:13:12 2017
From: jani.heikkinen at qt.io (Jani Heikkinen)
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 06:13:12 +0000
Subject: [Releasing] Meeting minutes from Qt Release Team meeting 15.08.2017
Message-ID: <HE1PR02MB3132D2137E04F9EE1F4FA3AD9D820@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>

Meeting minutes from Qt Release Team meeting 15th August 2017

Qt 5.10 status:
- First binary snaphot available
- Fix proposal for qt5.git integration issue available
- Plan from now on:
   1. get fix merged in 'dev' (Done)
   2. get qt5.git integrated in 'dev' (Ongoing)
   3. start soft branching
      * During this soft branching period everyone should have enough time to get pending changes in 'dev' before final downmerge
   4. finalize branching ~ a week after starting.
   5. do packaging & release Alpha as soon as possible
- We are also planning to publish new binary snapshot(s). But those aren't required for alpha
  
Qt 5.6.3 status:
- First binary snapshot finally coming
- At the moment no known release blockers, see https://bugreports.qt.io/issues/?filter=18879
- We will branch '5.6.3' from '5.6' soon, after few provisioning updates are in
   *  https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/196019/ and https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/202123

Qt 5.9.2 status:
- Target is to start creating first snapshot for testing immediately when qt5.git integration succeed in '5.9' (ongoing)
- We will start branching after 5.6 merged in 5.9

Next meeting Tue 22.8.2017 16:00 CET

br,
Jani

irc log below:
[17:00:01] <jaheikki3> akseli: iieklund: thiago: fkleint: ZapB: tronical:vladimirM: aholza: peter-h: mapaaso: ankokko: fkleint: carewolf: fregl:ablasche:ping 
[17:00:55] <thiago> jaheikki3: pong
[17:00:57] <akseli> jaheikki3: pong
[17:01:06] <jaheikki3> Time to start qt release team meeting
[17:01:12] <jaheikki3> On agenda today:
[17:01:16] <jaheikki3> Qt 5.10 status
[17:01:20] <jaheikki3> Qt 5.6.3 status
[17:01:27] <jaheikki3> Qt 5.9.2 status
[17:01:35] <jaheikki3> Something else to the agenda?
[17:02:53] <thiago> 5.11 branching status
[17:03:44] <ZapB> jaheikki3: pong
[17:03:51] <jaheikki3> thiago: what do you mean? Do you mean when 'dev' == 5.11 or what?
[17:04:40] <thiago> yes, when the branching will finish
[17:05:01] <jaheikki3> ok, it will be handled in 5.10 status ;) 
[17:05:03] <thiago> when the 5.10 branch exists so we can start pushing 5.11 stuff
[17:05:19] <jaheikki3> Yeah. let's start from 5.10 status
[17:05:36] <jaheikki3> First binary snapshot available
[17:06:16] <jaheikki3> there has been problems with qt5.git integration in 'dev' and that's why branching not started yet
[17:06:43] <jaheikki3> It seems we have finally fix proposal available, see https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/202505/
[17:06:43] <qt_gerrit> jaheikki3: [qt/qtbase/5.9] Change source identifier type in ProString from Simon Hausmann - https://codereview.qt-project.org/202505 (MERGED)
[17:07:32] <jaheikki3> It got just integrated so now it needs to be merged in 'dev' as soon as possible. lqi ;)
[17:07:56] <jaheikki3> So the plan from now on is:
[17:08:19] <jaheikki3> 1. get fix merged in 'dev'
[17:08:33] <jaheikki3> 2. get qt5.git integrated in 'dev'
[17:08:42] <jaheikki3> 3. start soft branching
[17:09:13] <jaheikki3> 4. finalize branching ~ a week after starting.
[17:09:32] <jaheikki3> 5. do packaging & release Alpha as soon as possible
[17:10:07] <thiago> so for now we continue with 5.10 fixes in dev
[17:10:12] <jaheikki3> And we will try to publish new binary snapshot(s) as well but those aren't required for alpha
[17:10:17] <thiago> when soft branching starts, we ask ossi for retarget?
[17:11:03] <jaheikki3> thiago: no need to retarget before branching is finalized. that soft branching period is just for finalizing ongoing changes for 5.10 still in dev
[17:11:47] <jaheikki3> so there will be last downmerge from dev to 5.10 ~ a week after branching is started
[17:12:09] <thiago> the point is that we don't know when our changes will be integrated
[17:13:44] <jaheikki3> true. If some change isn't integrated in dev early enough and is needed for 5.10 then you should ask ossi to retarget
[17:14:04] <jaheikki3> But as I wrote there is still at least a week to get all needed integrated
[17:14:52] <jaheikki3> thats pretty much all about 5.10 at this time. Any other comments or questions?
[17:15:36] <ZapB> i may have a number of retargets as we can't get them in before a qt5 integration
[17:15:49] <ZapB> they depend upon a change in qtbase
[17:16:01] <ZapB> but will try do them during the soft branch period
[17:16:04] -*- thiago is waiting for one +2 in the imddle of a series
[17:16:40] <jaheikki3> ZapB: great. Let's hope all is working now OK & you can get changes in early enough
[17:17:06] <jaheikki3> Ok. Then 5.6.3 status:
[17:17:28] <jaheikki3> First binary snapshot finally coming & should be available tomorrow
[17:18:03] <jaheikki3> At the moment no known blockers, see https://bugreports.qt.io/issues/?filter=18879
[17:18:24] <jaheikki3> But I bet that will change when all can start testing ;)
[17:18:59] <jaheikki3> We have already ran some RTA for 5.6.3 and actually it seems to be pretty good condition
[17:20:35] <jaheikki3> And I think we should start branching '5.6.3' from '5.6' now as well to be able to control the changes coming in now. Do you agree?
[17:21:50] <tronical> jaheikki3: hmmm
[17:22:14] <tronical> jaheikki3: can you wait with 5.6.3 branching until https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/196019/ and https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/202123/ are in?
[17:22:16] <qt_gerrit> jaheikki3: [qt/qt5/5.6] Make CI use a new provisioned Win 10 template from Joni Jäntti - https://codereview.qt-project.org/196019 (NEW)
[17:22:16] <qt_gerrit> jaheikki3: [qt/qt5/5.6] Provisioning: Disable system updates from Heikki Halmet - https://codereview.qt-project.org/202123 (NEW)
[17:22:42] <tronical> jaheikki3: (ETA this week)
[17:23:02] <jaheikki3> tronical: sure, thanks for pointing those.
[17:23:50] <jaheikki3> So lets agree to start branching from '5.6' to '5.6.3' after those two changes are merged in '5.6'
[17:24:13] <jaheikki3> Any other comments or questions about 5.6.3?
[17:24:54] <tronical> jaheikki3: yes
[17:25:11] <tronical> jaheikki3: we also need https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/202394/ in the  5.6.3 release
[17:25:15] <qt_gerrit> jaheikki3: [qt/qtdeclarative/5.6] Fix crash in QQuickAnimatedImage from Shawn Rutledge - https://codereview.qt-project.org/202394 (INTEGRATING)
[17:26:19] <jaheikki3> OK, it seems to be integrating already
[17:26:44] <jaheikki3> Then finally 5.9.2 status:
[17:27:20] <jaheikki3> Target is to start creating first snapshot for testing immediately when qt5.git integration succeed in '5.9'
[17:28:24] <jaheikki3> And we should also start branching from '5.9' to '5.9.2' immediately after qt5.git integration succeed in '5.9' 
[17:28:42] <lqi> will redo the qtbase 5.9-dev merge then
[17:28:57] <tronical> jaheikki3: same as with 5.6.3: we need a merge from 5.6 in qt5.git before IMO we should branch qt5 5.9
[17:29:12] <ZapB> I think there's a compilation fix needs to go in for qt3d in 5.9 followign a change in qtdeclarative
[17:29:21] <ZapB> will check with paul when he's back tomorrow
[17:29:27] <jaheikki3> tronical: ahh, true. will make all easier ;)
[17:29:28] <tronical> ZapB: yes
[17:29:29] <thiago> question on ordering: 5.6.3 before 5.9.2?
[17:29:55] <tronical> we need https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/201614/ in 5.9 before we can branch qt5 5.9
[17:29:56] <qt_gerrit> tronical: [qt/qt3d/5.9] Fix Quick3DNode factories following QQmlType changes from Paul Lemire - https://codereview.qt-project.org/201614 (NEW)
[17:30:56] <ZapB> but qt3d win7 mingw node seems broken at the moment https://testresults.qt.io/coin/integration/qt/qt3d/tasks/1502805621
[17:31:00] <jaheikki3> thiago: I would say which ever is ready earlier. I would bet 5.9.2 because that should be quite ready already now & 5.9.3 is coming quite soon as well
[17:31:05] <ZapB> on 5.9 and dev branches
[17:31:29] <ZapB> log file is missing so I have no clue why
[17:32:06] <thiago> I would prefer that 5.6.3 come first, so we can say in the 5.9.2 changelog that it includes all fixes in 5.6.3
[17:32:24] <thiago> we don't want someone to upgrade from 5.6.3 to 5.9.2 and find a fix regressing
[17:34:07] <jaheikki3> thiago: is that really needed? We could say that same in 5.9.3? There is that much changes in '5.6' and I believe we need to do few iterations before we are ready for release. But with 5.9.2 we should be quite close so is there really any reason do delay it because of 5.6.3?
[17:34:42] <lqi> https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/202559/ updated
[17:34:42] <qt_gerrit> lqi: [qt/qtbase/dev] Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/5.9' into dev from Liang Qi - https://codereview.qt-project.org/202559 (NEW)
[17:35:25] <thiago> preferable
[17:36:05] <thiago> it should be enough to stabilise 5.6.3 while we're doing 5.10
[17:37:06] <jaheikki3> Lets check all that when we get test results both from 5.6.3 and 5.9.2. If 5.6.3 is in decent condition we can put it out quite soon as well
[17:37:10] <jaheikki3> ok?
[17:38:39] <jaheikki3> but doing reqular 5.9.x releases is important as well. It should be quite easy now when amount of changes isn't that big
[17:41:10] <jaheikki3> Ok, lets check all this again after we have test results from first snapshots available.
[17:41:45] <jaheikki3> This was all at this time. Lets end this meeting now & have new one tue 22.8 as planned
[17:41:59] <jaheikki3> Thanks for your participation, bye!
[17:42:28] <ZapB> thanks and bye!

From jani.heikkinen at qt.io  Wed Aug 16 13:43:49 2017
From: jani.heikkinen at qt.io (Jani Heikkinen)
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 11:43:49 +0000
Subject: [Releasing] First Qt 5.6.3 snapshot available
Message-ID: <HE1PR02MB3132580C254D954F4580A35B9D820@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>

Hi,

We have finally first Qt 5.6.3 binary snapshot available for testing. Snapshot is available only via online installer and you can do clean installation or add it as a part of existing one. Detailed instructions here: https://wiki.qt.io/How_to_get_snapshot_via_online_installer . Note: snapshot can be found under 'Preview' node from installer ui.

Snapshot is based on https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/201968/ . RTA smoke is ran for this snapshot and it seems to be ok for bigger testing so please test the snapshot and report your effort via https://wiki.qt.io/Qt563_release_testing

Please test this snapshot as soon as possible; we need to get understanding where we are with the release. There is really much changes in since 5.6.2 which we released almost a year ago...

Br,
Jani

From jani.heikkinen at qt.io  Wed Aug 23 08:48:12 2017
From: jani.heikkinen at qt.io (Jani Heikkinen)
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 06:48:12 +0000
Subject: [Releasing] Meeting minutes from Qt Release Team meeting 22.08.2017
Message-ID: <HE1PR02MB31327F3B088E78E3213B16B89D850@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>

Meeting minutes from Qt Release Team meeting 22nd August 2017

Qt 5.10 status:
- qt5.git integration in 'dev' still failing -> branching from 'dev' to '5.10' not started yet
- Target to start soft branching immediately after qt5.git integration succeed & finalize branching ~a week
 
Qt 5.6.3 status:
- First binary snapshot under testing. Seems to be pretty good shape...
- Agreed provisioning changes not in yet -> we cannot start branching from '5.6' to '5.6.3' yet
- What about change logs for Qt 5.6.3: We are in cherry pick mode in '5.6' so should we do change logs in '5.9' instead & cherrypick those then in '5.6.3'? Or directly in '5.6.3'? To be agreed in different mail thread

Qt 5.9.2 status:
- gt5.git integration finally succeed
- content already exported & finalizing packaging configurations ongoing
- target is to get first snapshot for testing during this week

Next meeting Tue 29.8.2017 16:00 CET

br,
Jani

irc log below:
[17:00:26] <jaheikki3> akseli: iieklund: thiago: fkleint: ZapB: tronical:vladimirM: aholza: peter-h: mapaaso: ankokko: fkleint: carewolf: fregl:ablasche:ping 
[17:01:37] <jaheikki3> Time to start qt release team meeting
[17:02:25] <jaheikki3> Let's browse through the release statuses ( 5.10, 5.6.3 & 5.9.2) even there isn't that much changes since last meeting
[17:02:32] <jaheikki3> Any additional item to the agfenda?
[17:03:24] <akseli> jaheikki3: late pong
[17:03:40] <jaheikki3> Lets start from 5.10 status:
[17:04:04] <jaheikki3> We are still trying to get qt5.git integration succeed in 'dev'
[17:04:18] <jaheikki3> And that's why branching is still not started
[17:04:37] <jaheikki3> New try is ongoing, see https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/201350/
[17:04:37] <qt_gerrit> jaheikki3: [qt/qt5/dev] Update submodules on 'dev' in qt5 from Qt Submodule Update Bot - https://codereview.qt-project.org/201350 (INTEGRATING)
[17:05:08] <jaheikki3> Hoping it finally succeed & we can start soft branching 
[17:06:05] <jaheikki3> And and as usual branching will be finalized ~ a week after starting soft branching
[17:06:30] <jaheikki3> So it is still slightly possible to get alpha out at the end of this month (as planned)
[17:06:49] <jaheikki3> But let's see that after we really can start the branching
[17:06:59] <jaheikki3> Any comments or questions?
[17:07:22] <akseli> sounds good to me
[17:08:45] <jaheikki3> then Qt 5.6.3 status:
[17:09:01] <jaheikki3> First binary snapshot under testing
[17:09:53] <jaheikki3> Some findings already reported but content seems to be pretty good shape still
[17:10:32] <jaheikki3> Those provisioning related changes aren't in yet so we cannot start branching yet
[17:11:17] <jaheikki3> But on the other hand I am thinking if we need to branch 5.6.3 from 5.6 at all: there isn't that much changes coming in anymore
[17:11:26] <jaheikki3> Any thoughts?
[17:12:52] <frkleint> jaheikki3: is copyright year really a blocker for 5.6.3?
[17:13:09] <akseli> lets not change process between patch releases but continue as earlier and create 5.6.3 branch
[17:13:24] <jaheikki3> frkleint: no, I don't think so
[17:13:42] <frkleint> jaheikki3: Same here, should it be changed in a LTS..
[17:13:51] <frkleint> is it worth the hassle...
[17:14:12] <jaheikki3> akseli: That's ok for me, it isn't that big task to be done
[17:14:50] <frkleint> Do we need changelogs for 5.6.3... ;-) ?
[17:15:04] <frkleint> given  that  not much changed..
[17:15:49] <jaheikki3> frkleint: well, I think we need. There is more than 1000 changes since 5.6.2
[17:15:56] <frkleint> uah
[17:17:01] <frkleint> Should they be added to 5.9 and then cherry-picked over as well...
[17:17:27] <frkleint> well probably not.
[17:18:28] <jaheikki3> frkleint: I think those can be done in 5.6.3 directly. But we aren't doing merges from '5.6' -> '5.9' and so on those will be missing from '5.9' ->
[17:18:47] <jaheikki3> Will that be a problem then?
[17:19:31] <frkleint> That is the question, do they have any relevance...
[17:19:44] <frkleint> Any git experts around..how would tackle this?
[17:20:56] <jaheikki3> I think we can't agree that here today so I'll start mail discussion about this in dev ML
[17:21:01] <frkleint> yes
[17:21:49] <frkleint> cherry-pick from 5.6.3 into 5.9 for which the sanity bot will cry murder...
[17:23:02] <jaheikki3> And I think sanitybot will cry if change files are done directly to '5.6.3'
[17:23:24] <jaheikki3> But lets see what others thinks after my mail 
[17:23:37] <jaheikki3> Thats all about 5.6.3 at this time
[17:23:41] <jaheikki3> Then 5.9.2:
[17:24:33] <jaheikki3> qt5.git integration succeed finally in 5.9.2
[17:25:00] <jaheikki3> content already exported & finalizing packaging configurations ongoing
[17:25:04] <frkleint> in 5.9, you mean?
[17:25:13] <frkleint> there is not branch yet, is there?
[17:25:21] <jaheikki3> frkleint: Yeah, true. We haven't branched yet
[17:25:35] <frkleint> [that would be a disaster since regression fixes are still integrating]
[17:25:40] <frkleint> pending
[17:26:26] <jaheikki3> Yeah. we are still working in '5.9'
[17:26:48] <jaheikki3> target is to get first snapshot for testing during this week
[17:26:49] <frkleint> and COIN is slow/dysfunctional as always...
[17:26:58] <frkleint> hm,ok
[17:27:00] <jaheikki3> true
[17:27:27] <jaheikki3> but this will be just a snapshot, not rc yet
[17:27:42] <frkleint> ok, and then branching, I guess
[17:28:30] <jaheikki3> yes, we will start branching from '5.9' to '5.9.3' after that. But we will get those few provisioning related changes from '5.6' in first
[17:29:08] <jaheikki3> That's all at this time
[17:29:33] <jaheikki3> Let's end the meeting now & have new one tue 29.8 as planned
[17:29:45] <jaheikki3> Thanks for your participation, bye!
[17:29:50] <akseli> bye
[17:30:48] <frkleint> bye

From Simon.Hausmann at qt.io  Wed Aug 23 09:11:26 2017
From: Simon.Hausmann at qt.io (Simon Hausmann)
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 07:11:26 +0000
Subject: [Releasing] Meeting minutes from Qt Release Team meeting
 22.08.2017
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR02MB31327F3B088E78E3213B16B89D850@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
References: <HE1PR02MB31327F3B088E78E3213B16B89D850@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <VI1PR02MB10064CD6DEEB0A98E407E6B18C850@VI1PR02MB1006.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>

Hi,


Regarding the changelogs for 5.6.3, I have a suggestion:


    (1) The changes for 5.6.3 target the 5.9 branch in Gerrit.

    (2) Upon approval, Ossi could perhaps force-push them into the 5.9 branch of the module.

    (3) Right afterwards cherry-pick them to 5.6 and also force push them there.


I see no value in running changes to dist/changelog-XXX through the CI.


Simon

________________________________
From: Releasing <releasing-bounces+simon.hausmann=qt.io at qt-project.org> on behalf of Jani Heikkinen <jani.heikkinen at qt.io>
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 8:48:12 AM
To: releasing at qt-project.org
Subject: [Releasing] Meeting minutes from Qt Release Team meeting 22.08.2017

Meeting minutes from Qt Release Team meeting 22nd August 2017

Qt 5.10 status:
- qt5.git integration in 'dev' still failing -> branching from 'dev' to '5.10' not started yet
- Target to start soft branching immediately after qt5.git integration succeed & finalize branching ~a week

Qt 5.6.3 status:
- First binary snapshot under testing. Seems to be pretty good shape...
- Agreed provisioning changes not in yet -> we cannot start branching from '5.6' to '5.6.3' yet
- What about change logs for Qt 5.6.3: We are in cherry pick mode in '5.6' so should we do change logs in '5.9' instead & cherrypick those then in '5.6.3'? Or directly in '5.6.3'? To be agreed in different mail thread

Qt 5.9.2 status:
- gt5.git integration finally succeed
- content already exported & finalizing packaging configurations ongoing
- target is to get first snapshot for testing during this week

Next meeting Tue 29.8.2017 16:00 CET

br,
Jani

irc log below:
[17:00:26] <jaheikki3> akseli: iieklund: thiago: fkleint: ZapB: tronical:vladimirM: aholza: peter-h: mapaaso: ankokko: fkleint: carewolf: fregl:ablasche:ping
[17:01:37] <jaheikki3> Time to start qt release team meeting
[17:02:25] <jaheikki3> Let's browse through the release statuses ( 5.10, 5.6.3 & 5.9.2) even there isn't that much changes since last meeting
[17:02:32] <jaheikki3> Any additional item to the agfenda?
[17:03:24] <akseli> jaheikki3: late pong
[17:03:40] <jaheikki3> Lets start from 5.10 status:
[17:04:04] <jaheikki3> We are still trying to get qt5.git integration succeed in 'dev'
[17:04:18] <jaheikki3> And that's why branching is still not started
[17:04:37] <jaheikki3> New try is ongoing, see https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/201350/
[17:04:37] <qt_gerrit> jaheikki3: [qt/qt5/dev] Update submodules on 'dev' in qt5 from Qt Submodule Update Bot - https://codereview.qt-project.org/201350 (INTEGRATING)
[17:05:08] <jaheikki3> Hoping it finally succeed & we can start soft branching
[17:06:05] <jaheikki3> And and as usual branching will be finalized ~ a week after starting soft branching
[17:06:30] <jaheikki3> So it is still slightly possible to get alpha out at the end of this month (as planned)
[17:06:49] <jaheikki3> But let's see that after we really can start the branching
[17:06:59] <jaheikki3> Any comments or questions?
[17:07:22] <akseli> sounds good to me
[17:08:45] <jaheikki3> then Qt 5.6.3 status:
[17:09:01] <jaheikki3> First binary snapshot under testing
[17:09:53] <jaheikki3> Some findings already reported but content seems to be pretty good shape still
[17:10:32] <jaheikki3> Those provisioning related changes aren't in yet so we cannot start branching yet
[17:11:17] <jaheikki3> But on the other hand I am thinking if we need to branch 5.6.3 from 5.6 at all: there isn't that much changes coming in anymore
[17:11:26] <jaheikki3> Any thoughts?
[17:12:52] <frkleint> jaheikki3: is copyright year really a blocker for 5.6.3?
[17:13:09] <akseli> lets not change process between patch releases but continue as earlier and create 5.6.3 branch
[17:13:24] <jaheikki3> frkleint: no, I don't think so
[17:13:42] <frkleint> jaheikki3: Same here, should it be changed in a LTS..
[17:13:51] <frkleint> is it worth the hassle...
[17:14:12] <jaheikki3> akseli: That's ok for me, it isn't that big task to be done
[17:14:50] <frkleint> Do we need changelogs for 5.6.3... ;-) ?
[17:15:04] <frkleint> given  that  not much changed..
[17:15:49] <jaheikki3> frkleint: well, I think we need. There is more than 1000 changes since 5.6.2
[17:15:56] <frkleint> uah
[17:17:01] <frkleint> Should they be added to 5.9 and then cherry-picked over as well...
[17:17:27] <frkleint> well probably not.
[17:18:28] <jaheikki3> frkleint: I think those can be done in 5.6.3 directly. But we aren't doing merges from '5.6' -> '5.9' and so on those will be missing from '5.9' ->
[17:18:47] <jaheikki3> Will that be a problem then?
[17:19:31] <frkleint> That is the question, do they have any relevance...
[17:19:44] <frkleint> Any git experts around..how would tackle this?
[17:20:56] <jaheikki3> I think we can't agree that here today so I'll start mail discussion about this in dev ML
[17:21:01] <frkleint> yes
[17:21:49] <frkleint> cherry-pick from 5.6.3 into 5.9 for which the sanity bot will cry murder...
[17:23:02] <jaheikki3> And I think sanitybot will cry if change files are done directly to '5.6.3'
[17:23:24] <jaheikki3> But lets see what others thinks after my mail
[17:23:37] <jaheikki3> Thats all about 5.6.3 at this time
[17:23:41] <jaheikki3> Then 5.9.2:
[17:24:33] <jaheikki3> qt5.git integration succeed finally in 5.9.2
[17:25:00] <jaheikki3> content already exported & finalizing packaging configurations ongoing
[17:25:04] <frkleint> in 5.9, you mean?
[17:25:13] <frkleint> there is not branch yet, is there?
[17:25:21] <jaheikki3> frkleint: Yeah, true. We haven't branched yet
[17:25:35] <frkleint> [that would be a disaster since regression fixes are still integrating]
[17:25:40] <frkleint> pending
[17:26:26] <jaheikki3> Yeah. we are still working in '5.9'
[17:26:48] <jaheikki3> target is to get first snapshot for testing during this week
[17:26:49] <frkleint> and COIN is slow/dysfunctional as always...
[17:26:58] <frkleint> hm,ok
[17:27:00] <jaheikki3> true
[17:27:27] <jaheikki3> but this will be just a snapshot, not rc yet
[17:27:42] <frkleint> ok, and then branching, I guess
[17:28:30] <jaheikki3> yes, we will start branching from '5.9' to '5.9.3' after that. But we will get those few provisioning related changes from '5.6' in first
[17:29:08] <jaheikki3> That's all at this time
[17:29:33] <jaheikki3> Let's end the meeting now & have new one tue 29.8 as planned
[17:29:45] <jaheikki3> Thanks for your participation, bye!
[17:29:50] <akseli> bye
[17:30:48] <frkleint> bye
_______________________________________________
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/20170823/5e961eca/attachment.html>

From jani.heikkinen at qt.io  Wed Aug 23 11:20:26 2017
From: jani.heikkinen at qt.io (Jani Heikkinen)
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 09:20:26 +0000
Subject: [Releasing] Qt 5.6.3 change files etc (was: Meeting minutes from Qt
 Release Team meeting 22.08.2017)
In-Reply-To: <VI1PR02MB10064CD6DEEB0A98E407E6B18C850@VI1PR02MB1006.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
References: <HE1PR02MB31327F3B088E78E3213B16B89D850@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>,
	<VI1PR02MB10064CD6DEEB0A98E407E6B18C850@VI1PR02MB1006.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <HE1PR02MB313266963AE58BA5FEBF442E9D850@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>

>
>________________________________________
>From: Simon Hausmann
>Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2017 10:11 AM
>To: Jani Heikkinen; releasing at qt-project.org
>Subject: Re: Meeting minutes from Qt Release Team meeting 22.08.2017
>
>Hi,
>
>
>Regarding the changelogs for 5.6.3, I have a suggestion:
>
>
>   (1) The changes for 5.6.3 target the 5.9 branch in Gerrit.
>
>    (2) Upon approval, Ossi could perhaps force-push them into the 5.9 branch of the module.
>
>    (3) Right afterwards cherry-pick them to 5.6 and also force push them there.
>

Sounds ok for me. Ossi, is this ok for you (there is again some extra work planned to you ;) )? 
If that is the way we agree to proceed the we could start creating 5.6.3 change files in '5.9' already now

>
>I see no value in running changes to dist/changelog-XXX through the CI.
>
>
>Simon

Me either ;)

Then I have another issue related to branching from '5.6' to '5.6.3':
- I don't think we need to do soft branching here, right? there isn't that much changes ongoing in '5.6' anymore so we could just do the branching immediately after all ready for it. Or does someone disagree


From thiago.macieira at intel.com  Wed Aug 23 18:03:10 2017
From: thiago.macieira at intel.com (Thiago Macieira)
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 09:03:10 -0700
Subject: [Releasing] Meeting minutes from Qt Release Team meeting
 22.08.2017
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR02MB31327F3B088E78E3213B16B89D850@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
References: <HE1PR02MB31327F3B088E78E3213B16B89D850@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <1894600.M4gbsBtaup@tjmaciei-mobl1>

On Tuesday, 22 August 2017 23:48:12 PDT Jani Heikkinen wrote:
> - What about change logs for Qt 5.6.3: We are in cherry pick mode in '5.6'
> so should we do change logs in '5.9' instead & cherrypick those then in
> '5.6.3'? Or directly in '5.6.3'? To be agreed in different mail thread

Why? Just override the bot. It's going to be one change anyway.

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



From jani.heikkinen at qt.io  Thu Aug 24 06:41:57 2017
From: jani.heikkinen at qt.io (Jani Heikkinen)
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 04:41:57 +0000
Subject: [Releasing] Meeting minutes from Qt Release Team meeting
 22.08.2017
In-Reply-To: <1894600.M4gbsBtaup@tjmaciei-mobl1>
References: <HE1PR02MB31327F3B088E78E3213B16B89D850@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
	<1894600.M4gbsBtaup@tjmaciei-mobl1>
Message-ID: <HE1PR02MB31329F8C65E908D366F0D64A9D9A0@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Releasing [mailto:releasing-bounces+jani.heikkinen=qt.io at qt-
> project.org] On Behalf Of Thiago Macieira
> Sent: keskiviikko 23. elokuuta 2017 19.03
> To: releasing at qt-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Releasing] Meeting minutes from Qt Release Team meeting
> 22.08.2017
> 
> On Tuesday, 22 August 2017 23:48:12 PDT Jani Heikkinen wrote:
> > - What about change logs for Qt 5.6.3: We are in cherry pick mode in '5.6'
> > so should we do change logs in '5.9' instead & cherrypick those then
> > in '5.6.3'? Or directly in '5.6.3'? To be agreed in different mail
> > thread
> 
> Why? Just override the bot. It's going to be one change anyway.
? There should be one change file for each submodule? Or are you proposing we should stop delivering those in 5.6.x & use only one combined one?
There isn't merge from '5.6.3' (except in qt5.git level) anymore --> if we do change files directly in '5.6.3' those won't end up in '5.9' -> at all. And the question is if those would have any relevance there?

There is now that new mail thread related to this (http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/2017-August/030719.html); let's continue discussion there & make the final conclusion as soon as possible.

br,
Jani





From thiago.macieira at intel.com  Thu Aug 24 06:53:55 2017
From: thiago.macieira at intel.com (Thiago Macieira)
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 21:53:55 -0700
Subject: [Releasing] Meeting minutes from Qt Release Team meeting
 22.08.2017
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR02MB31329F8C65E908D366F0D64A9D9A0@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
References: <HE1PR02MB31327F3B088E78E3213B16B89D850@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
	<1894600.M4gbsBtaup@tjmaciei-mobl1>
	<HE1PR02MB31329F8C65E908D366F0D64A9D9A0@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <1913738.A46T4ZA2RS@tjmaciei-mobl1>

On Wednesday, 23 August 2017 21:41:57 PDT Jani Heikkinen wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Releasing [mailto:releasing-bounces+jani.heikkinen=qt.io at qt-
> > project.org] On Behalf Of Thiago Macieira
> > Sent: keskiviikko 23. elokuuta 2017 19.03
> > To: releasing at qt-project.org
> > Subject: Re: [Releasing] Meeting minutes from Qt Release Team meeting
> > 22.08.2017
> > 
> > On Tuesday, 22 August 2017 23:48:12 PDT Jani Heikkinen wrote:
> > > - What about change logs for Qt 5.6.3: We are in cherry pick mode in
> > > '5.6'
> > > so should we do change logs in '5.9' instead & cherrypick those then
> > > in '5.6.3'? Or directly in '5.6.3'? To be agreed in different mail
> > > thread
> > 
> > Why? Just override the bot. It's going to be one change anyway.
> 
> ? There should be one change file for each submodule? 

Right. One change per submodule.

> Or are you proposing
> we should stop delivering those in 5.6.x & use only one combined one? There
> isn't merge from '5.6.3' (except in qt5.git level) anymore --> if we do
> change files directly in '5.6.3' those won't end up in '5.9' -> at all. And
> the question is if those would have any relevance there?

Oh, that. Right, I had forgotten the fact that it should exist in 5.9 too.

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



From oswald.buddenhagen at qt.io  Thu Aug 24 10:24:58 2017
From: oswald.buddenhagen at qt.io (Oswald Buddenhagen)
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 10:24:58 +0200
Subject: [Releasing] Qt 5.6.3 change files etc (was: Meeting minutes
 from Qt Release Team meeting 22.08.2017)
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR02MB313266963AE58BA5FEBF442E9D850@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
References: <HE1PR02MB31327F3B088E78E3213B16B89D850@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
	<VI1PR02MB10064CD6DEEB0A98E407E6B18C850@VI1PR02MB1006.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
	<HE1PR02MB313266963AE58BA5FEBF442E9D850@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <20170824082458.GA8257@ugly>

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 11:20:26AM +0200, Jani Heikkinen wrote:
> >   (1) The changes for 5.6.3 target the 5.9 branch in Gerrit.
> >
> >    (2) Upon approval, Ossi could perhaps force-push them into the 5.9 branch of the module.
> >
> >    (3) Right afterwards cherry-pick them to 5.6 and also force push them there.
> >
> 
> Sounds ok for me. Ossi, is this ok for you (there is again some extra work planned to you ;) )? 
>
sure. a direct push (i very much hope it's not a forced push ;) isn't
exactly a lot of effort.


From jani.heikkinen at qt.io  Sun Aug 27 11:02:05 2017
From: jani.heikkinen at qt.io (Jani Heikkinen)
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2017 09:02:05 +0000
Subject: [Releasing] HEADS-UP: Branching from 'dev' to '5.10' started
Message-ID: <HE1PR02MB3132F6F3842254AC589E71479D990@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>

HI all,


We have finally soft branched '5.10' from 'dev'. Target is to have final downmerge from 'dev' to '5.10'  Friday 1st September



Please finalize ongoing changes in 'dev' and start using '5.10' for new changes targeted to Qt 5.10.0 release.



br,

Jani Heikkinen

Release Manager

The Qt Company



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/releasing/attachments/20170827/f23a932f/attachment.html>

From jani.heikkinen at qt.io  Wed Aug 30 14:21:24 2017
From: jani.heikkinen at qt.io (Jani Heikkinen)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 12:21:24 +0000
Subject: [Releasing] Qt 5.9.2 snapshot available
Message-ID: <HE1PR02MB31329BE3FFE340F8570949EE9D9C0@HE1PR02MB3132.eurprd02.prod.outlook.com>

Hi,

We have new Qt 5.9.2 snapshot available via online installer. Instructions how to get it here: https://wiki.qt.io/How_to_get_snapshot_via_online_installer

Snapshot is based on https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/203493/

Packages are smoke tested and seems to be OK so please take a tour. Please report your effort via https://wiki.qt.io/Qt59_release_testing

br,
Jani Heikkinen
Release Manager