Qt 5.5.0 Post Mortem: Difference between revisions

From Qt Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
No edit summary
 
Line 5: Line 5:
** Perhaps we should do header reviews before the beta (as well as later) in order to catch problems early and avoid trying to address them in a rush.
** Perhaps we should do header reviews before the beta (as well as later) in order to catch problems early and avoid trying to address them in a rush.
* Last minute issues detected in the binary installers
* Last minute issues detected in the binary installers
** We have a ChangeLog for the Qt modules, but not for the installers. Such a detailed list would help verifying the packages.
** We have a ChangeLog for the Qt modules, but not for the installers. Such a detailed list would help verifying the packages. Also, checking a diff of the file content compared to the last releases for each package would have spotted broken things like qtwebview missing, missing gstreamer backends ...


== What was causing the delays & how we could improve those ==
== What was causing the delays & how we could improve those ==
* CI system instability
* CI system instability
* We should be able to release extra betas if there are blockers delaying a proper RC. There should never be more than a month between releases once the first beta is out.
* We should be able to release extra betas if there are blockers delaying a proper RC. There should never be more than a month between releases once the first beta is out.
* There's always confusion what should be in the packages, and what not.


== What went well & what should be continued ==
== What went well & what should be continued ==

Latest revision as of 08:09, 2 July 2015

What needs to be improved & how

  • API Reviews & process
    • There were lots of discussion & changes related to public APIs very late of releasing process. That needs to be improved for the future releases so that API reviews are done early enough & official header diff is just a final verification
  • Header diffs should be done earlier
    • Perhaps we should do header reviews before the beta (as well as later) in order to catch problems early and avoid trying to address them in a rush.
  • Last minute issues detected in the binary installers
    • We have a ChangeLog for the Qt modules, but not for the installers. Such a detailed list would help verifying the packages. Also, checking a diff of the file content compared to the last releases for each package would have spotted broken things like qtwebview missing, missing gstreamer backends ...

What was causing the delays & how we could improve those

  • CI system instability
  • We should be able to release extra betas if there are blockers delaying a proper RC. There should never be more than a month between releases once the first beta is out.
  • There's always confusion what should be in the packages, and what not.

What went well & what should be continued

Something else

  • Be very vocal and clear about intended support for compilers and toolchains