On Monday 08 June 2015 15:36:21 Thiago Macieira wrote: > On Thursday 04 June 2015 15:29:10 Frederik Gladhorn wrote: > > It's time for the header diffs, please help review the changes (Qt 5.4.2 > > to 5.5.0) to make sure nothing that was added to the public headers > > slipped through when it shouldn't be there. > > We seem to be doing API reviews and finding mistakes in the code. Please > note that the header diff does not include new files, so we're not doing > API reviews on any new classes. > > API reviews should have been done twice already, before RC stage. It needs > to be done once before the API is merged and once again between the alpha > and beta releases. > > Are we skimping on our processes?
Looking at some of the classes in modules other than QtBase, I get the feeling they were not widely reviewed, no. It would probably be a good idea to do an additional header diff (incl. new headers) on the ML after the alpha. I don't follow the development of modules other than QtBase closely, nor do I want to, and apparently I'm too strict a reviewer to be regularly invited on new API :) Thanks, Marc -- Marc Mutz <marc.m...@kdab.com> | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company Tel: +49-30-521325470 KDAB - The Qt Experts _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
