Hi, since this partly about Qml support which I'm personally involved in, I'd like to add my two cents :)
> [...] > Creator mainline is not working. I have reports both from internal and > external users on a regular basis of either creator not building, or > creator crashing upon startup. I have pushed the externals to submit > bugreports, but, again, my experience here has been less than glowing. > Being close to the front lines of the project, sometimes this can be missed. It would be interesting to know which platform / compiler they are using. Cause I personally have been working with bleeding edge creator since the early beginning, and it was rare that I had to switch to a different version altogether. I'm working 8 hours a day with latest master. Sure, there are crashes from time to time, but that's probably to be expected with "bleeding edge", and we can normally sort them out rather quickly. > To fix these issues, can we implement some sort of staging/CI system > like we have for Qt? I don't see that a staging system would gain us much. First, the Qt staging/CI system is heavily based on autotests, but the creator autotest suite isn't up to really catch most issues. I think we should have more autotests (you can always have more autotests!), but then again testing a UI program with good coverage is inherently difficult ... So, I don't think it would gain you that much in terms of stability. Second, the experiences we have with the Qt autotest system when it comes to integration delays aren't exactly encouraging ;) Right now we can quickly respond to a bug report with "fixed it, will be available to externals in 12 hours". This would change to "fixed it, might take weeks until it is be available to you". This is btw especially true for the Qml support, where we had to quickly react to changes in the QtDeclarative API in the past ... An IMO more viable alternative would be to have some sort of tested snapshots now and then. > For qml usage, bleeding edge is the only choice currently, and the > perceived quality of creator from the bleeding edgers is that > creator's... not usable at all. Well, you can stick to e.g. the Alpha, and even creator 1.3 has some limited QML support. The QML text editor + runtime infrastructure has been pretty stable for me anyhow. Regarding QmlDesigner - yeah, the quality is not yet up to where it should be, but then again it's still in the Alpha stages, and one part of the problem is also that we do have received rather minimal feedback so far. So please, people - if you find something, report it! > That is not the Qt way, and not a > perception we should be having. Creator is an excellent product, and one > I use daily, and I'd like to go back to bleeding edge, as that's where > all the cool new features are :) Understandable :) I think we have managed to get along pretty well so far with our very 'lean' development model, based on continuous feedback rather than any continuous integration system ... Now QtCreator is getting more and more features that we as core developers aren't using ourselves every day, so we will probably need a better QA. But I really don't want to see the momentum we have being killed by processes. Regards Kai Koehne _______________________________________________ Qt-creator mailing list Qt-creator@trolltech.com http://lists.trolltech.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator _______________________________________________ Qt-creator mailing list Qt-creator@trolltech.com http://lists.trolltech.com/mailman/listinfo/qt-creator
