08.02.2018, 11:17, "Lars Knoll" <[email protected]>: >> On 8 Feb 2018, at 08:35, Thiago Macieira <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Wednesday, 7 February 2018 19:32:25 PST Kevin Kofler wrote: >>> We are now in early February. By your schedule, 5.11 will be out on the >>> last >>> day of May. That's a whopping 4 months without a Qt release from the >>> current (non-LTS) branch! In that time, at least 2 batches of Chromium >>> security updates will happen. And that does not even account for the >>> inevitable slips that consistently happen. >> >> I want to point out that we appeared to have fixed our release problems. The >> last time we had released a .2, aside from the LTS 5.6.2, was 5.4.2. > > Yes, I think we have fixed most of the problems related to getting releases > out. What we haven’t yet fixed good enough is how to work with 5 open > branches at the same time. The cost of handling those is largely invisible to > those not doing the work, but it’s there. The merges from one branch to the > next plus updates to qt5.git are the main problem here. Those do cost a lot > of time and effort that go away from bug fixing and testing. > >> But we HAD fixed the problem. 5.9.2 was released before 5.10.0. In fact, >> even >> 5.9.3 was released before 5.10.0. This means we managed TWO releases between >> 5.9.1 and 5.10.0. Taking this to the case now, it would allow us to release >> 5.9.5 and 5.10.2 before 5.11.0 if we wanted to. > > Most of the releases were done form 5.9, where we do not have a problem that > we need to merge changes from another branch. But getting 5.10 out was again > pretty painful due to the merges from 5.9. We often had very long times > between successful qt5.git updates. Having one additional branch with both > 5.10 and 5.11 and dev where we need to cascade merges will make that problem > quite a bit bigger. > > So we’re still not in the world I’d like to have where we can handle multiple > branches in a good way. This is something we need to try to solve and find > ways to handle better. > > One thing we’re doing currently is adding more capacity to CI. This has been > a bottleneck that was slowing down merges and qt5.git updates. Better > capacity should be in place in early spring.
Have you considered assigning priorities to CI jobs? > > The other thing I believe we need to do is to find ways to automate merges > between branches and do those one a more continuous basis. Currently we often > ended up waiting many days until a fix had been merged into all relevant > branches, leading to delays in different places. Ideally those merges should > happen daily, not once every two weeks. > > If required, we could probably still do a 5.10.2, but if we do it, I’d like > to limit that one to security issues, and avoid the long merge chain from > 5.10 to dev until we have figured out how to handle that better. > > Cheers, > Lars > > _______________________________________________ > Development mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development -- Regards, Konstantin _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
