NIkolai Marchenko (13 January 2021 13:07)
> that's ... kinda what you're supposed to avoid... at least as far as I
> understand the convo earlier. so that two major versions aren't pushed
> to the same repo confusing people.
ah, I think I see the source of the confusion. IIUC, Qt 4 was a
monorepo, that contained everything that's now in sub-modules; so the
transition to Qt 5 was also the modularisation moment, calling for a new
repo. There's no problem with having several branches, even for major
versions, in the same repo. The only issue with Qt 6 living in the
qt5.git repo is that the repo name misguidedly suggests only Qt5 lives
there, when actually nothing prevents all later versions, major and
minor, going into it. So renaming it qt.git and having all future major
versions live there, along with the 5 and 6 it already contains, would
work just fine.
Compare qtbase.git, which contains Qt 5 and Qt 6 branches,
Eddy.
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
