Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Qt 5.7 Beta Is Running Behind Schedule

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Qt 5.7 Beta Is Running Behind Schedule

    Phoronix: Qt 5.7 Beta Is Running Behind Schedule

    While Qt 5.6 was just released after being delayed by months, Qt 5.7 was supposed to be a quick follow-on release but it too is already seeing delays...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ill-Be-Delayed

  • #2
    5.6 had the excuse of being an LTS release and needed to be rock solid. What's 5.7's excuse? And I hope this doesn't follow in the footsteps of Fedora.

    Comment


    • #3
      If someone has a big schedule and something happens that creates a considerable delay, then the big schedule is affected, as we know.
      Last edited by Nth_man; 03-31-2016, 08:12 AM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by bug77 View Post
        5.6 had the excuse of being an LTS release and needed to be rock solid. What's 5.7's excuse? And I hope this doesn't follow in the footsteps of Fedora.
        The excuse is that 5.6 just came out and everyone was making sure that actually finally happened, I imagine.

        5.7 shouldn't be delayed nearly as much, but releasing it literally a month and a half after 5.6 would have been dumb anyway.

        Comment


        • #5
          Wow, Qt running behind schedule, that's a new one...

          In other news, the sky is blue and water is wet.

          I honestly can't remember the last time Qt was on time. It is usually at least a month late and has been slipping further and further behind with ever release.

          Originally posted by zanny View Post
          5.7 shouldn't be delayed nearly as much, but releasing it literally a month and a half after 5.6 would have been dumb anyway.
          It would not have been dumb, 5.7 can't come soon enough, as it will finally fix a long standing and quite significant bug - deployment of QtQuick applications with static Qt builds.

          It was very silly to chose 5.6 for a LTS version, it should have been 5.8. But hey, poor management has become the trademark of Qt. Like their 1000$ a year "indie" license...
          Last edited by ddriver; 03-31-2016, 01:44 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ddriver View Post
            Wow, Qt running behind schedule, that's a new one...

            In other news, the sky is blue and water is wet.

            I honestly can't remember the last time Qt was on time. It is usually at least a month late and has been slipping further and further behind with ever release.
            Who cares if it is late. Qt releases are for the most part rock solid, which is more important then being on time. Software in general is always late. It isn't like baking a cake where you know if you stick it in the oven at 350 degrees it is going to be done in an hour.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by DarkCloud View Post

              Who cares if it is late. Qt releases are for the most part rock solid, which is more important then being on time. Software in general is always late. It isn't like baking a cake where you know if you stick it in the oven at 350 degrees it is going to be done in an hour.
              Then what's the purpose of declaring release dates? Why even bother if nobody cares?

              Because people do care, because Qt's "most part rock solid" releases are full of bugs, many of which persist for years and across multiple releases. Because releases promise features and bugfixes, and because people who use Qt in production and people who make their living on it need to plan ahead their own product releases. That's why.

              What truly boggles the mind is why are they promising release dates they outta know by now they can't deliver? Sure, they promise timely releases to create the impression things are running smoothly, but when they keep on failing to deliver in time it creates the very opposite impression. They have even moved ahead their "initial" planned release dates as they lag behind in attempts to mitigate the delays, which is rather lame.

              Comment


              • #8
                What software developers really promise release dates? And releases without bugs?

                Comment


                • #9
                  > full of bugs

                  That's not true. Qt is used by a lot, a lot of software. In fact, I'm writing this using Kubuntu, Qt based, and it works nicely. Anyone can try a virtual machine of it:
                  https://docs.google.com/folder/d/0B2...dfaGdJTUU/edit
                  and see it by himself. About it, there is a README.txt on the same web address.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Nth_man View Post
                    > full of bugs

                    That's not true. Qt is used by a lot, a lot of software. In fact, I'm writing this using Kubuntu, Qt based, and it works nicely.
                    Oh wow, we have a real software expert here, able to determine the absence of bugs just by being able to type Or just create an account and go see how many open issues the current release has, many of which critical.

                    According to the bug tracker, there are currently 13,664 bugs, and I am talking bugs only, not counting other issues. Historically, the number of bugs in Qt has been steadily rising, that is more new bugs are introduced than solved. 7,102 of those bugs are marked with priority 1 - CRITICAL.

                    Now, it might be just my standards, but I'd say having 13,664 bugs in it qualifies for "full of bugs", and I have hit several of those in my development just the last 3 months. What about you? How many bugs until it qualifies? 100k? A million?


                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X