+1 to 2.16 and then 3.0 On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 11:26 pm Martin Dobias <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 11:38 PM, Nyall Dawson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On 18 January 2016 at 09:03, Tim Sutton <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Dear QGIS Developers > >> > >> > >> For some time now we have been talking about moving to 3.0. The PSC is > looking for proposals on how to manage the process of moving to QGIS 3.0. > For a little more context please see the blog post I have made [1]. Once we > have all the proposals in (please see the example from Matthias Kuhn at the > bottom of the aforementioned post and keep it nice & simple) we will > collate them and then select one (or a hybrid of several) and share those > plans with the broader community. I will make all the proposals publicly > available and we will make the final decision in consultation with the > developer community. > >> > > > > Great summary Tim! Thanks for helping push this along. > > > > It's probably no surprise (since Matthias and I have spoken at length > > regarding this), but I'm in favour of Proposal 1. I just don't believe > > we have the resources to support any form of parallel development like > > proposal 2 requires. > > I am also in favour of proposal 1 (release 2.16 and then 3.0) as it > has a good balance in terms of how much time in advance 3.0 is > announced, how much time is there to adjust to py3/qt5, and how much > extra time can be used for API breaking changes. > > Cheers > Martin > _______________________________________________ > Qgis-developer mailing list > [email protected] > List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
_______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
