On 20/09/16 09:27, "Development on behalf of Thiago Macieira"
<development-bounces+lars.knoll=qt...@qt-project.org on behalf of
thiago.macie...@intel.com> wrote:
On terça-feira, 20 de setembro de 2016 09:02:11 PDT André Somers wrote:
> So, could you please explain, preferably without relying on all the
> acronyms, what problems this bureaucratization effort is trying to
> resolve, and how it fits the rest of our work flow (like making feature
> requests in Jira)?
Basically, QUIP extends the governance by formalising decisions. The
governance says decisions are made by consensus and meritocracy on the
mailing
list. But once the discussion ends, how do we know what we agreed upon? And
two years later, how do we find out what we had decided?
Can you remember the list of C++11 features we're allowed to use? We had a
discussion on the mailing list.
Do you remember why we decided not to have the Standard Library in our ABI?
That discussion happened in 2012.
The mailing list archives are searchable, but that doesn't mean it's easy
to
find what you're looking for.
And it formalizes the way we can discuss and comment on things, as QUIPs would
be reviewed in codereview, then approved there. I believe it’ll lead to a
better workflow and better decision making in the project than discussions on
the mailing list that often end somewhat inconclusive.
Cheers,
Lars
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
