[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-commits
Subject:    Re: qt-copy
From:       Alex Merry <kde () randomguy3 ! me ! uk>
Date:       2009-02-23 22:13:41
Message-ID: 200902232213.46624.kde () randomguy3 ! me ! uk
[Download RAW message or body]


On Monday 23 February 2009 21:48:52 Alexis Ménard wrote:
> This thing has been reporting to Qt Software ?
>
> It should be reported...
>
> Btw is it the correct way to patch directly the src files? Because i think
> it will start to be a big mess if evreybody start to commit directly in the
> source files. Especially to delete patches, commit that need to be removed
> or more for merging at each patch release. I am not sure what is the policy
> here.

From README.qt-copy:

  If you have fixed a bug in Qt or modified it in any way that may
  benefit others, please share your change in the form of a patch. Do
  not commit your changes directly to the qt-copy module because they
  may be lost in a future update if they have not been added to the
  official Qt release.

However, an exception generally seems to be made for critical fixes that have 
already been implemented in the next version of Qt.  So David Faure committed 
directly to the tree because it was a patch directly from Qt Software that 
fixed a serious regression, and I committed one to qt-copy before it became 
4.5-rc1 because it was a one-line fix for a crasher that had already been 
committed to mainline Qt.

The SHM patch should NOT be directly applied to qt-copy sources, though, as 
it's merely a speed-up, and hasn't even been submitted to Qt (according to the 
patch header), let alone accepted.

Alex


-- 
Why have I got six monitors?  Because I haven't got room for eight.
  -- Terry Pratchett


["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]