Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

Sergey Shambir wrote: > I just put it here > GNOME#Past_releases > List_of_Ubuntu_releases#Table_of_versions > > Ubuntu (and other distros) maintainers should have at least one month, > i guess. Once we have our release process in shape, say after a successful 5.0.0 and 5.1.0, we can look at alig

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

Alan Alpert wrote: > On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 18:59:28 Abecasis Joao wrote: >> When you mention "destabilizing" changes the truth is most of the >> time we don't know which ones those are. Here, we try to increase >> stability by limiting the type of changes that go into each branch: >> only regressions

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

Charley Bay wrote: > Honest question, this isn't a proposal, but don't we have *TWO* issues > being considered? > > (1)- "Levels-of-stability" (for the next release) > (2)- "Evolving-APIs/Features" (for future releases) > > I don't want to "explode" the issue, but that seems to imply (to me) >

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

Sven Anderson wrote: > On 07.08.2012 13:09, joao.abeca...@nokia.com wrote: >> While the two setups are very similar, almost isomorphs, they're not >> exactly so. There are important practical consequences that >> distinguish the two. >> >>      - Releases happen on a fixed schedule >>      - Minor

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

I just put it here GNOME#Past_releases List_of_Ubuntu_releases#Table_of_versions Ubuntu (and other distros) maintainers should have at least one month, i guess. _

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 18:59:28 Abecasis Joao wrote: > On 7. aug. 2012, at 02:45, Alan Alpert wrote: > > On Mon, 6 Aug 2012 22:13:30 ext joao.abeca...@nokia.com wrote: > >> Fire-hose is a development branch, things may be variously broken at all > >> times. Typically, developers in this mailing list wi

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

On Aug 7, 2012, at 5:12 PM, ext Rick Stockton wrote: > On 08/06/2012 02:22 PM, joao.abeca...@nokia.com wrote: >> Hello Qt-ians, >> << SNIP >> >> >> * The branches >> >> The three branches define a progression of decreasing rate-of-change and >> thus increasing stability. >> >> - Fire hose - t

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

Ben spaketh: > As one of those who is working towards being a new contributor, I > would want a use a generally stable branch for most of the initial work of > adding a new module; and then move it up towards "fire-hose" just prior to > pushing it out to everyone. > > That is: > > - Grab the 6 m

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

> From: Oswald Buddenhagen > Subject: Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project > On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 11:00:26AM +0200, ext Thiago Macieira wrote: >> My recommendation is that master be one of the two stable branches. > That's >> what p

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

On 08/06/2012 02:22 PM, joao.abeca...@nokia.com wrote: > Hello Qt-ians, > << SNIP >> > > * The branches > > The three branches define a progression of decreasing rate-of-change and > thus increasing stability. > > - Fire hose - the main development branch. It supports the minor release >cycle.

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

On 07.08.2012 13:09, joao.abeca...@nokia.com wrote: > While the two setups are very similar, almost isomorphs, they're not exactly > so. There are important practical consequences that distinguish the two. > > - Releases happen on a fixed schedule > - Minor versions have a defined lif

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

Sven Anderson wrote: > On 07.08.2012 01:12, Thiago Macieira wrote: >> On terça-feira, 7 de agosto de 2012 01.00.54, Olivier Goffart wrote: >>> ---+--+-- fire-hose >>>/ \ / / / / / / / / \ / / / / / / >>> --+ +-+++

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 11:00:26AM +0200, ext Thiago Macieira wrote: > My recommendation is that master be one of the two stable branches. That's > what people cloning from Git should get. > well, HEAD doesn't have to point to master. but anyway, your point is that HEAD should point to the semi-st

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

Hi, On 07.08.2012 01:12, Thiago Macieira wrote: > On terça-feira, 7 de agosto de 2012 01.00.54, Olivier Goffart wrote: >> ---+--+-- fire-hose >> / \ / / / / / / / / \ / / / / / / >> --+ +-+++ +-++-

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

On 7. aug. 2012, at 10:10, ext lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote: > In general I like the model. As Thiago said it's pretty close to what we've > been discussing internally before we started Qt 5 development. > > I agree that we should kickstart the model after the beta release. Branch > names should

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

Lars Knoll wrote: > In general I like the model. As Thiago said it's pretty close to what we've > been > discussing internally before we started Qt 5 development. > > I agree that we should kickstart the model after the beta release. Branch > names should be more concrete and for outsiders to un

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

On terça-feira, 7 de agosto de 2012 08.10.22, lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote: > I agree that we should kickstart the model after the beta release. Branch > names should be more concrete and for outsiders to understand, so I'm with > Alan to give then easy to understand names. My proposal would be maste

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

On 7. aug. 2012, at 02:45, Alan Alpert wrote: > On Mon, 6 Aug 2012 22:13:30 ext joao.abeca...@nokia.com wrote: >> Fire-hose is a development branch, things may be variously broken at all >> times. Typically, developers in this mailing list will be tracking that >> branch. >> >> Leaky-faucet is de

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

On Tuesday, August 07, 2012 08:10:22 lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote: > * Depending on our policies, we might never need to merge back from stable > to beta to master. Policy could simply be that beta and stable only > cherry-pick changes from master, in which case there's no need to ever > merge back.

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

Olivier Goffart wrote: > On Monday 06 August 2012 21:22:27 joao.abeca...@nokia.com wrote: > [...] >> >> -+--+-- fire-hose >> \ \ >> -+-+--+++-+--++ leaky-faucet >> \\\

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

In general I like the model. As Thiago said it's pretty close to what we've been discussing internally before we started Qt 5 development. I agree that we should kickstart the model after the beta release. Branch names should be more concrete and for outsiders to understand, so I'm with Alan to

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

On Mon, 6 Aug 2012 22:13:30 ext joao.abeca...@nokia.com wrote: > Fire-hose is a development branch, things may be variously broken at all > times. Typically, developers in this mailing list will be tracking that > branch. > > Leaky-faucet is deemed beta quality and somewhat more stable. At the ver

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

On terça-feira, 7 de agosto de 2012 01.00.54, Olivier Goffart wrote: > ---+--+-- fire-hose >/ \ / / / / / / / / \ / / / / / / > --+ +-+++ +-++ leaky-faucet > / \ / / / \ / / / \ / / / \ / /

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

On Monday 06 August 2012 21:22:27 joao.abeca...@nokia.com wrote: [...] > > -+--+-- fire-hose >\ \ > -+-+--+++-+--++ leaky-faucet >\\\\\\ > -+-

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

On terça-feira, 7 de agosto de 2012 00.20.56, Thiago Macieira wrote: > On segunda-feira, 6 de agosto de 2012 22.13.30, joao.abeca...@nokia.com wrote: > > Leaky-faucet is deemed beta quality and somewhat more stable. At the very > > least it shouldn't break as often. We can expect that more people w

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

On segunda-feira, 6 de agosto de 2012 22.13.30, joao.abeca...@nokia.com wrote: > Leaky-faucet is deemed beta quality and somewhat more stable. At the very > least it shouldn't break as often. We can expect that more people will be > willing to track this branch with their own development. One more

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

Thiago Macieira wrote: > One think I'd like to know from others is: what does dripping-bucket contain > when changes are not going in, in-between releases? From the description and > from the graph, it sounds like that branch contains the next release before > it is tested out. That is, it's a bran

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

Thiago Macieira wrote: > Thanks for putting it together. I like it. It's what we had discussed over a > year ago and it makes sense to me. For context, I proposed this setup internally before. The beginning of Qt 5's development made most of the proposal temporarily mute. It is now a good time to

Re: [Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

On segunda-feira, 6 de agosto de 2012 21.22.27, joao.abeca...@nokia.com wrote: > What do others think? Thanks for putting it together. I like it. It's what we had discussed over a year ago and it makes sense to me. I think that the patch release process could be adjusted a little. For example, th

[Development] Setting up time-based releases for the project

Hello Qt-ians, While releasing Qt 5.0.0 is an ongoing process, I think this is a good time to start planning future releases (5.0.1, 5.1.0, etc.) and, most importantly, we need to discuss *how* we'll get them out on time. With the setup we now have we should quickly move to a strict time-based re