12.04.2018, 20:34, "william.croc...@analog.com" <william.croc...@analog.com>: >>> So, are you saying that the 5.10 branch has been abandoned. >> >> No, it's been *closed*. There's a difference. > > If it is closed then I assume issues will not be fixed. > I call that abandoned. > >>> If so, I do not think the web site should offer it as a download candidate. >> >> Huh, why? What's the rationale for this? > > For me I saw it in a distinguished position (tip of the next-to-last branch) > and yet it had known issues which were not fixed nor would, apparently, ever > be > fixed. > >>> I saw that 5.11 was on the tip and, therefore, assumed that >>> the latest 5.10 was good and stable. >> >> It is. > > If I may raise my voice for a moment... > > No. It (5.10.1) is NOT good. > > It immediately failed one of my regression tests. > You should have known there was an issue because I here it has been fixed in > 5.11
In a software project of size and scope of Qt, it would be simply impossible to produce a release without any known issue in a finite amount of time. And discovery of bugs in release is not a reason to revoke it, unless it is important security issue or fatal regression that affect every user. > > Fortunately I did not spend too much time blaming my code. > I submitted a bug report and was offered 3 patches which fixed the problem. > > I think leaving that prominent, dangling version with known > issues is irresponsible. > > Fix 5.10.1 (and make a 5.10.2) or take it away. > > Back to calm voice... > > Thanks. > > Bill > > _______________________________________________ > Interest mailing list > Interest@qt-project.org > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest -- Regards, Konstantin _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
