[Releasing] Meeting minutes from Qt Release Team meeting 15.08.2017
jani.heikkinen at qt.io
Wed Aug 16 08:13:12 CEST 2017
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
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!
More information about the Releasing