To be fair to all, there should probably be an agreed upon understanding on what would need fixing/implementing for the rotation feature to sticik prior to 2.8, and if it can't be achieved by then revert the commits until next dev cycle?
I can't be the judge of that, senior devs needed :) On 23 Dec 2014 19:06, "Nathan Woodrow" <madman...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I agree with Paolo, and also see the value of Sandro's argument that > developing such functionality in a branch get's much less > testing/viewing and is very hard to merge back. Myself I only had a > serious look at it when it was in master... > > Sometimes it's not about other people testing, sometimes it's about having > time for other developers to review the code, even just by eyeing it over, > before it is merged in. Other people might be able to pick up things that > you might miss and save you the effort of bug fixing it later, or you might > be doing it completely wrong to start with. > > Sometimes it is also about not having a feature until it is ready, some > things just need to wait until they are ready. > > I also understand that sometimes things seem simple but lead to more > issues then you expect, we have all been there, however that is why we have > testing branches It makes the user experience in QGIS a lot nicer. > > I am in no way against the feature, it is a good one, in fact I have a use > for it in Roam, and I do not wish to undermine Sandro's efforts rotation is > a big task, however as it has the possibility of introducing regressions it > should be treated with care - also merging a feature in and then trying to > get more funding for bugs is IMO not a cool move. > > If you write code that has small impact, import/export bookmarks for > example, I don't care if something like that is merged right in, small foot > print, small use case, easy fix, but for something that touches a major > core part of the code I think reviews should be done. > > - Nathan > > On Tue Dec 23 2014 at 8:10:18 PM Richard Duivenvoorde <rdmaili...@duif.net> > wrote: > >> On 23-12-14 08:06, Paolo Cavallini wrote: >> > Hi Nyall, >> > >> > Il 22/12/2014 23:47, Nyall Dawson ha scritto: >> > >> >> I disagree - while there may be an issue with the difficulty of getting >> >> wide testing of pull requests, the solution isn't to allow broken code >> >> into master. >> > >> > You're right, we're big boys now, must behave. However: >> > * the code is in good shape, not broken; works smoothly in a variety of >> > situations >> > * it opens a whole set of new and exciting applications, e.g. live >> > tracking, drone monitoring, etc. >> > * there are unsupported functions, as pointed out >> > * if we remove it from master, it will soon become unmergeable, and will >> > probably get lost; it happened several times in the past that what we >> > left out of the door was never recovered. >> > Overall, I still believe keeping it, but letting conscious users >> > activate it when necessary, is a good compromise. >> > In the meantime, we can start raising funds to complete the set of >> > necessary features (I do not think it's a huge amount of work, once the >> > money is found we have time to implement these for 2.8). >> > All the best, and thanks for your thoughts. >> >> I agree with Paolo, and also see the value of Sandro's argument that >> developing such functionality in a branch get's much less >> testing/viewing and is very hard to merge back. Myself I only had a >> serious look at it when it was in master... >> >> So as long as we can hide it for normal users (even without tickbox, we >> can make a cli-option for it :-) ), AND nothing is broken I'm in favour >> of letting it in master. >> >> I think Sandro should hide the spinbox in the statusbar for now, and >> nay-sayers should now try to find bugs related to rotation work? >> >> There is a PSC-meeting on 2th januari, let's make the final decision >> there. >> >> Regards, >> >> Richard Duivenvoorde >> _______________________________________________ >> Qgis-developer mailing list >> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >> > > _______________________________________________ > Qgis-developer mailing list > Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >
_______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer