On sexta-feira, 11 de janeiro de 2013 20.18.52, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 03:51:02PM +0000, shane.kea...@accenture.com wrote: > > > NOTE: No cherry-picks this time !! > > > > What about changes that are integrated to stable already but missed > > the branch due to unrelated test failures delaying the integration? > > your premise is already wrong. > if it failed integration and you already knew that and when the branch > will be created, then you should have abandoned, waited for the branch > creation, and re-targeted the change. ergo, your fault, and you deal > with the consequences (your precious change will have to wait for the > next release). > if you didn't know the timing of the branching (*), the fact that the > first integration(s) failed is irrelevant. > > (*) that would be your fault, too, as iikka announced it with sufficient > headroom. i'd have liked a more precise branching time specification, but > otoh that just increases the risk of people making a too tight bet.
If you think the fix is important for 5.0.1, cherry-pick yourself and resubmit to release. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
