On Friday 23 August 2013 07:50:56 Olivier Goffart wrote: > On Thursday 22 August 2013 22:18:54 Antti Kaijanmäki wrote: > > On 22.08.2013 21:51, Thiago Macieira wrote: > > > On quinta-feira, 22 de agosto de 2013 21:26:15, Antti Kaijanmäki wrote: > > >> I have patches (linked in the bug) to amend this, and I would like to > > >> get some feedback on them. > > > > > > Hello Antti > > > > > > If you can, please upload the patches to codereview.qt-project.org. It's > > > easier to discuss them there. > > > > Either I was not clear enough or I have misunderstood something, but the > > links to the patches in codereview.qt-project.org are in that bug report. > > :) > Thanks for the patch, I will have a look. > However, the patches do not fix a regression, neither a P1 bug, so they > should go to the 'dev' branch instead of the 'stable' branch.
This is weird https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,63593 approved by you is linked to a P3 https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,63496 is also linked to a P3 https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,63535 is also linked to a P3 https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,63413 is linked to a P2 https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,63595 is not linked to any bug https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,62408 is also not linked to any bug https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,62948 is linked to a bug without categorization Also i don't understand that "P1 rule for stable", what's the rationale to not fixing bugs in stable? That's what stable branch is for, no? I could understand "P1 rule for release", but for stable, what if i fix a small bug (which I understand won't be categorized as P1), why should people wait for the fix of that small bug for Qt 5.2 instead of 5.1.x? Cheers, Albert _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
