Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-09-08 Thread Edward Welbourne
On Wednesday 07 September 2016 10:26:44 Olivier Goffart wrote: >> The reason we should limit the changes to critical change is so than >> "jumping through hoops" gets easier. Every patch we put there instead >> of in a upper branch makes more work of merging, handling regressions >> causing by

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-09-07 Thread Tuukka Turunen
> -Original Message- > From: Development [mailto:development- > bounces+tuukka.turunen=qt...@qt-project.org] On Behalf Of Stottlemyer, > Brett (B.S.) > Sent: keskiviikkona 7. syyskuuta 2016 14.56 > To: development@qt-project.org > Subject: Re: [Development] Which

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-09-07 Thread Stottlemyer, Brett (B.S.)
On 9/7/16, 4:26 AM, "Development on behalf of Olivier Goffart" wrote: >But in the end, we want our users to upgrade. So they >can reconsider the reason they cannot upgrade while weighing the new features/

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-09-07 Thread Marc Mutz
On Wednesday 07 September 2016 10:26:44 Olivier Goffart wrote: > On Dienstag, 16. August 2016 10:48:27 CEST Marc Mutz wrote: > > On Tuesday 16 August 2016 10:06:09 Olivier Goffart wrote: > > > On Freitag, 12. August 2016 09:02:08 CEST Thiago Macieira wrote: > > [...] > > > > > > I agree with

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-09-07 Thread Olivier Goffart
On Dienstag, 16. August 2016 10:48:27 CEST Marc Mutz wrote: > On Tuesday 16 August 2016 10:06:09 Olivier Goffart wrote: > > On Freitag, 12. August 2016 09:02:08 CEST Thiago Macieira wrote: > [...] > > > > I agree with Marc, we should allow fixing bugs besides those that are > > > critical or

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-08-16 Thread Jędrzej Nowacki
On fredag 12. august 2016 10.52.52 CEST Marc Mutz wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to know what the rules are supposed to for submitting to 5.6 (LTS). > > Should we enforce the strict rules of other minor releases (only regressions > and P2+)? I strongly believe that autotests improvements should go to

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-08-16 Thread Marc Mutz
On Tuesday 16 August 2016 10:06:09 Olivier Goffart wrote: > On Freitag, 12. August 2016 09:02:08 CEST Thiago Macieira wrote: [...] > > I agree with Marc, we should allow fixing bugs besides those that are > > critical or regressions. Even the regression category will change: once > > 5.6 is a year

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-08-16 Thread Olivier Goffart
On Freitag, 12. August 2016 09:02:08 CEST Thiago Macieira wrote: > On sexta-feira, 12 de agosto de 2016 14:00:10 PDT Marc Mutz wrote: > > Well, we told people "look, Qt 5.7 will drop support for your platform, > > and > > require C++11, but don't worry: you have 5.6 LTS". I doubt those people > >

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-08-13 Thread Thiago Macieira
On sábado, 13 de agosto de 2016 20:30:39 PDT Gunnar Roth wrote: > >> b. adding EditorFont to qplatformtheme.h enumeration ,has also no risk. > > > > Not allowed per Qt API compatibility promise: code compiled with Qt 5.6.x > > must run just fine with Qt 5.6.y even if y < x. > > Well thats

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-08-13 Thread Gunnar Roth
Hi Thiago, thanks for you answers. > Am 13.08.2016 um 20:05 schrieb Thiago Macieira : > > On sábado, 13 de agosto de 2016 18:08:16 PDT Gunnar Roth wrote: >> 1. category is just adding code, which does not influence current >> code. >> a. adding qAsConst in qgolbal.h.

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-08-13 Thread Thiago Macieira
On sábado, 13 de agosto de 2016 18:08:16 PDT Gunnar Roth wrote: > 1. category is just adding code, which does not influence current > code. > a. adding qAsConst in qgolbal.h. That is actually something i really > like to have in qt 5.6, because it is very useful and has no risk. Except that

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-08-13 Thread Gunnar Roth
Hi Thiago, to make qt 5.6.x support the quick controls2 there are only a few changes needed. 1. category is just adding code, which does not influence current code. a. adding qAsConst in qgolbal.h. That is actually something i really like to have in qt 5.6, because it is very useful and has

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-08-12 Thread Thiago Macieira
On sexta-feira, 12 de agosto de 2016 14:03:24 PDT Gunnar Roth wrote: > Does a request of having qtquickcontrols2 and qtvirtualkeyboard 2.1 > backported to 5.6. x have chance? Actually I managed to do this myself, but > an upstream solutuion is preferrable. The problem is that some important OS >

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-08-12 Thread Thiago Macieira
On sexta-feira, 12 de agosto de 2016 14:00:10 PDT Marc Mutz wrote: > Well, we told people "look, Qt 5.7 will drop support for your platform, and > require C++11, but don't worry: you have 5.6 LTS". I doubt those people > would be happy if they didn't get their bugs fixed because they don't >

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-08-12 Thread Gunnar Roth
: Freitag, 12. August 2016 um 13:18 Uhr Von: "Lars Knoll" <lars.kn...@qt.io> An: "Olivier Goffart" <oliv...@woboq.com> Cc: "Qt development mailing list" <development@qt-project.org> Betreff: Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6? &

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-08-12 Thread Marc Mutz
On Friday 12 August 2016 13:18:52 Lars Knoll wrote: > > On 12 Aug 2016, at 12:01, Olivier Goffart wrote: > > > > > > On Freitag, 12. August 2016 10:52:52 CEST Marc Mutz wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> > >> > >> I'd like to know what the rules are supposed to for submitting to 5.6 >

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-08-12 Thread Lars Knoll
> On 12 Aug 2016, at 12:01, Olivier Goffart wrote: > > On Freitag, 12. August 2016 10:52:52 CEST Marc Mutz wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'd like to know what the rules are supposed to for submitting to 5.6 (LTS). >> >> Should we enforce the strict rules of other minor releases (only

Re: [Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-08-12 Thread Olivier Goffart
On Freitag, 12. August 2016 10:52:52 CEST Marc Mutz wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to know what the rules are supposed to for submitting to 5.6 (LTS). > > Should we enforce the strict rules of other minor releases (only regressions > and P2+)? > > IMHO, 5.6 is not like 5.5. So with another 2+ years

[Development] Which changes are suitable for 5.6?

2016-08-12 Thread Marc Mutz
Hi, I'd like to know what the rules are supposed to for submitting to 5.6 (LTS). Should we enforce the strict rules of other minor releases (only regressions and P2+)? IMHO, 5.6 is not like 5.5. So with another 2+ years of 5.6 lifetime, more relaxed rules should apply. I'd like all bug-fixes