Hi Thiago, Like I wrote, I generally consider this task done, except for the naming issues. I have an impression that we will be able to come to an agreement in a reasonable time frame.
However, if you think that there are more issues, let's discuss them and see what we can do to fix them. I totally agree that we shouldn't merge something that is not 100% ready. Best regards, Ivan ------------------------------------ Ivan Solovev Senior Software Engineer The Qt Company GmbH Erich-Thilo-Str. 10 12489 Berlin, Germany ivan.solo...@qt.io<mailto:ivan.solo...@qt.io> www.qt.io<https://www.qt.io> Geschäftsführer: Mika Pälsi, Juha Varelius, Jouni Lintunen Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 144331 B ________________________________ From: Development <development-boun...@qt-project.org> on behalf of Thiago Macieira <thiago.macie...@intel.com> Sent: Friday, June 2, 2023 4:47 PM To: development@qt-project.org <development@qt-project.org> Subject: Re: [Development] Requesting Feature Freeze Exception for C++20 comparison On Friday, 2 June 2023 05:18:57 PDT Ivan Solovev via Development wrote: > I'd like to request a Feature Freeze exception for the C++20 comparison > task, due to the last-minute discussions about the names of the helper > functions to be used. This is important because these helper functions are > intended to be exposed as public API. Is it important that we do this in 6.6? This API is likely to be very important for us going forward, so why not take the time and ensure we've caught all issues? -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Cloud Software Architect - Intel DCAI Cloud Engineering
-- Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
