-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi all.
Il 10/11/2014 13:13, Jonathan Moules ha scritto:
> Then why not fix the bugs and require them to be backported? I
> know that seems flippant, but is there a reason that backporting by
> the submitter/committer can't be required for any bugfix
sources than
QGIS.
Just my 2p.
Cheers,
Jonathan
-Original Message-
From: qgis-developer-boun...@lists.osgeo.org
[mailto:qgis-developer-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Paolo Cavallini
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2014 9:59 AM
To: qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [Qgis-developer]
Hi all,
QEP #4 allows to do backports for every release. Not only LTR. 2.6.1
will be very welcome.
LTR releases will be available for 1 year and will receive bugfixes
during that time. That's not going to happen magically. That requires
power users and organizations to help the development. Thank
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 09:56:22AM +, Nathan Woodrow wrote:
> relevant.. This obviously has to be done smart but using the recent crash
> and project corruption as an example that Martin fixed right away, to me
> this warrants a new release off that branch, LTS or not, as project
> corruption
Hi Paolo and all developers,
Il 10/11/2014 09.42, Paolo Cavallini ha scritto:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Il 10/11/2014 09:31, Martin Dobias ha scritto:
really valued much beyond the above scores, but it's nice to see
people get excited about such geeky stuff.
Hi all,
I hat
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Il 10/11/2014 10:56, Nathan Woodrow ha scritto:
> IMO we don't need "resources" to do bug fixing. The dev that does
> the bug fix in master can do it in the 2.x branch for that stable
> release if
Sorry I do not agree here: we had many cases of fixe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Il 10/11/2014 10:42, Luca Manganelli ha scritto:
> So, I believe that in production environment the most stable (!=
> latest) version is used. For almost 2 years we used 1.7.4, for me
> the most stable QGIS version in earth (more than 2.4 and 2.6!).
> So, I believe that in production environment the most stable (!=
latest) version is used. For almost 2 years we used 1.7.4, for me the
most stable QGIS version in earth (more than 2.4 and 2.6!).
Oh man. I couldn't even use 1.7.4 anymore it's so old ;)
Anyway the point is a valid one. Running t
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:42:42AM +0100, Luca Manganelli wrote:
> So, I believe that in production environment the most stable (!=
> latest) version is used. For almost 2 years we used 1.7.4, for me the
> most stable QGIS version in earth (more than 2.4 and 2.6!).
Yep, that little third number i
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Paolo Cavallini wrote:
> To me, the whole issue boils down to having resources to do
> serious backporting of fixes. Without that, LTS will have no practical
> effect, as users will use the latest, more bugfixed version.
"more bugfixed" is not always true. We had
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Il 10/11/2014 09:31, Martin Dobias ha scritto:
> really valued much beyond the above scores, but it's nice to see
> people get excited about such geeky stuff.
Hi all,
I hate cooling down the enthusiasm, but I really see LTS as an empty
word. To me,
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Luca Manganelli wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 5:57 AM, Geo DrinX wrote:
>> Yes yes yes.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> but also +999 :)
>
> And why not + ?
Seeing this I can't resist to quote a bit of PEP-10 [1]
"""
+1 I like it
+0 I don't care, but go ahead
-0 I don
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 5:57 AM, Geo DrinX wrote:
> Yes yes yes.
>
> +1
>
> but also +999 :)
And why not + ?
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Anita,
Thanks for pointing out QEP#4, I wasn't aware of it. Tim has done an
impressive work there.
The above-mentioned QEP is a long term thing, what I was suggesting is a
very short term (i.e. 2 cycles) proposal to try and satisfy the current
needs for stability and devlopment momentum. I also a
Are you aware of QEP3? Please read Tim's suggestion. There are good reasons
for this stable 4 month cycle at exactly the current release times of the
year.
Best wishes
Anita
On Nov 10, 2014 5:57 AM, "Geo DrinX" wrote:
> Yes yes yes.
>
> +1
>
> but also +999 :)
>
>
> Roberto
>
> 2014-11-10 2:
Hi,
I am not part of the development of QGIS, but as a user, please consider
the following:
Currently every 3rd release of QGIS is billed as a Long Term Release.
So:
Switch this to February every Even numbered year
Yes, this thought is in line with Ubuntu LTS plans, and I am ware not
Yes yes yes.
+1
but also +999 :)
Roberto
2014-11-10 2:27 GMT+01:00 Mathieu Pellerin :
> Guys,
>
> The recent thread Nyall kick-started with his “QGIS 3.0?” email got me to
> think about the eternal stability vs. development dilemma it (re-)exposed
> through the conversation.
>
> More spe
Guys,
The recent thread Nyall kick-started with his “QGIS 3.0?” email got me to
think about the eternal stability vs. development dilemma it (re-)exposed
through the conversation.
More specifically, it got me to brainstorm on the best way forward for QGIS
at this juncture and whether there's a w
18 matches
Mail list logo
