On Thursday, 27 September 2018 09:03:55 PDT Giuseppe D'Angelo via Interest wrote: > Il 27/09/2018 17:14, Roland Hughes ha scritto: > > On 9/27/18 1:53 AM, Kim Hartman wrote: > > The short answer is that you shouldn't. > > > > The AGILE processes behind Qt development > > 1) This is an unproven and unwarranted assertion about whatever way Qt > is developed. Since most of upstream development happens behind close > doors at TQC, please refrain from making such statements, unless you > happen to be working at TQC and can comment on the matter. And, even so, > other development (e.g. the one *I personally* do on Qt) does not happen > to be using agile processes.
Nor mine. And I did work for Trolltech and Nokia, and back then we did not use agile. I doubt the team is using it now. > > means that a lot of shortcuts > > get taken and are allowed as long as the test-nothing automated test > > clears Jenkins. > > This is simply FUD, and it's offensive to whoever (like me) develops Qt > as an external contributor and still cares about its quality. And we don't use Jenkins. This is a completely FALSE assertion, no basis in truth, intended to do harm. It's very easily proven wrong, since the testing is open, clearly tests and failures cause changes to be rejected. In other words, this sentence is defamation. Roland, consider yourself on notice. Your comment about OpenZinc was fine -- even if it is a competitor, telling people about their options is the right thing to do. You can relate your experience with Qt and where things did not satisfy you. But you cannot make false assertions and stupid generalisations. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Interest mailing list Interest@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
