On 15.10.2019 12.35, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > the gist is that this somewhat complicated downmerge process exists for > good reasons. it shifts the "logistical" load of dealing with the > branching from every contributor to the few people involved in the > branch management. > > history (now found via browsing archives; it appears impossible to > google that message without putting the exact subject in quotes): > https://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/releasing/2014-August/001804.html > there appears to be no other public list activity related to this. > apparently, everything happened on irc. > > the previous installment of evolving policy was here: > https://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/releasing/2014-February/001618.html > (that's essentially what you want to go back to). > as you can see from the dates, it took us a single feature release to > conclude that another change was necessary.
Thanks a lot for digging these up. I'll withdraw this proposal. Firstly, because I learned the motivation for the current approach better during the course of this thread and thus no longer want to push for the change. And secondly, because a new branching model discussion is ongoing and the currently most probable resolution of that will make the whole downmerging step disappear anyway. -- Kari _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development