>>>>> "Peter" == Peter Kümmel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Peter> Just complaining about the "crying wolfs" is not enough, only Peter> arguments count. But each change has it risk, and I understand Peter> that someone people think some changes are too risky, because Peter> each decision could be wrong. Peter> But what could be wrong in removing qt3? When we release 1.5 Peter> with qt4, could someone imagine we release 1.5 also with qt3, Peter> who will do it? Could you imagine that we will switch back to Peter> qt3 because we will find out that qt4 doesn't fit our needs? Either we release 1.5 as qt4 only or we do it qt3/4. There is no turning back indeed. But I am not sure what your argument is. Peter> The only advantage I could see in supporting qt3 until 1.5 is Peter> out is the impact on 1.4. How does qt3 in trunk help the 1.4 Peter> branch? There is no impact on 1.4. There is no question that we'll move to qt4 only eventually . The question is to know what the correct timeframe is. JMarc
