Sorvig Morten wrote: > Knoll Lars <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > looks like there's quite some discussion about Thiago's proposal. > > Let's see if we can get at least agreement on most of the changes > > and then focus on the parts that are controversial. > > To me this looks like a case where there clearly won't be a consensus, > which means we're going to need a Chief Maintainer decision at some > point. I hope we can all respect what ever that will be, and then move on.
The problem is only solved by a decision if the decision is "stay put". In the other case, someone has to cleanup the fallout. Neither tooling nor user projects will magically adjust just because there was a Word. Andre' PS: I honestly start wondering how a change with such an impact can be seriously considered _at all_ that late in the process. Trivial additions have been rejected for months because we are in feature freeze and now _that_. _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
