Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
Il 27/06/2014 10:43, Vincent Picavet ha scritto: We should definitly get more information on our user base, gather statistics (anonymous, or through website stats), so that we can know what really matters to our users. We should not develop software for ourselves, but for people who really use it. And final polish is probably the most important part. Yes this includes taking care of the user, marketing, ergonomy, fine wording and many things developers do not want to do or are bad at doing. Hi Vincent, this is a long standing issue (we have been discussing this extensively since Zuerich HF). I agree that knowing our user base is quite important for the future of the project. Of course we should not be obtrusive, and fully respect the privacy of users, but I think something can be done on this, maybe along the lines of Debian's popularity contest http://popcon.debian.org/ All the best. -- Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu QGIS PostGIS courses: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
For me, a summarize is: save two days of waiting (on a 4+ months schedule) so 1% users can compile while 99% get frustrated. Why can't we state that release is when windows + mac + ubuntu are ready? Many reported users get confused. Last time, people were asking where to find the installer. Isn't it sufficient proof this schema is not working well? On 27.06.2014 07:47, Sandro Santilli wrote: On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 09:03:08AM +1000, Nathan Woodrow wrote: a source release is like say yay release!But no you can't have it because your just a user you have to wait. You don't have to wait. You can have it now if you want. If you decided to give up your freedom for convenience, you can wait for someone to also bring you a chair and a pillow. On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 05:27:20PM +0200, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote: Looks like announcing the (source) release on qgis-developer and announcing individual packages on qgis-user would solve that problem. Agreed about splitting the announcement, althought I'd also announce source release on qgis-user. I don't think hiding existance of sources brings any benefit in the users community. This will make no difference, people watch the dev list especially around release time for news. Once you announce any kind of release, source or not, you have lost the ability to control where it will go and what people expect. Just watch how quick it will hit twitter, and then watch as people get confused why there is no download. It's mainly wording, it's all in the wording. I agree about wording being important. Announcing source release should have a link to the source tarball. Binary releases might even not need to be announced by the qgis team, as serious package managers conveniently implement those announces with user popups and the like... People really like our software and some are super excited about the release, to not have packages for download really looks bad IMO. There'll be a source package for download, so those that do not need a binary package don't have to wait to use it. And those that do _build_ binary packages (for systems you may not even know exist) have a way to download it and build their packages. I know we have a lot of users who love our stuff but can't get it when we say it's out. They _can_ get it, it may just be not yet wrapped the way which is more comfortable for them. They only need to be informed about what's available and what not. It's like saying you can't say apples are ripe! because then people get frustrated by not finding them on their supermarket shelf. Nature's PSC: people love apples, stop making them fall on the ground ! --strk; () ASCII ribbon campaign -- Keep it simple ! /\ http://strk.keybit.net/rants/ascii_mails.txt ___ 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
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
On 27/06/2014 4:35 pm, Denis Rouzaud denis.rouz...@gmail.com wrote: For me, a summarize is: save two days of waiting (on a 4+ months schedule) so 1% users can compile while 99% get frustrated. I suspect the actual fraction of users who compile is much much smaller than this. Maybe 1 in a thousand at most, probably much lower still. Why can't we state that release is when windows + mac + ubuntu are ready? +1 from me. Nyall ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
Probably the keypoint of this discussion are the different point of views on what the dev community consider the final point of a development cycle. Some consider it the source ball and the packaging a plus. Others include the packages themselves (in their mindset). I don't want to open a discussion on this but I think that a project like QGIS, which is extending its user base, cannot consider that the majority of its users even don't know how a software is made. And I don't blame them, as I don't know the intricacies of the smartphone I'm writing on right know. If the problem is convincing people to donate to support the complete lifecycle of the project well, this is a different point, but I don't think we will get there hoping they understand what's under the job of releasing a ready to go package... giovanni Il 27/giu/2014 08:45 Nyall Dawson nyall.daw...@gmail.com ha scritto: On 27/06/2014 4:35 pm, Denis Rouzaud denis.rouz...@gmail.com wrote: For me, a summarize is: save two days of waiting (on a 4+ months schedule) so 1% users can compile while 99% get frustrated. I suspect the actual fraction of users who compile is much much smaller than this. Maybe 1 in a thousand at most, probably much lower still. Why can't we state that release is when windows + mac + ubuntu are ready? +1 from me. Nyall ___ 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
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 04:30:44PM +1000, Nathan Woodrow wrote: On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Sandro Santilli s...@keybit.net wrote: It's like saying you can't say apples are ripe! because then people get frustrated by not finding them on their supermarket shelf. This is incorrect. The apples are ripe is current master after freeze, might be some bugs still but it's pretty good. A better compare is saying Extra! We have apples ready to go,*goes to shop*.tomorrow. We are the shop. Ready to go is when apples leave the tree. That'd be a tag in contrast to a branch (like master). I went looking at the 2.2.0 announcement, it's here: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/2014-February/031125.html It clearly states that only the source code was made available, but I think it was an error not to give a direct link to the source tarball. Instead, the link generically points to the homepage of qgis.org, from which it is even hard to find the source tarball. Is maybe that the reason why people get frustrated. I tried finding today (tarball for 2.2.0) and still don't see it: http://qgis.org/en/site/forusers/download.html The sources tab points to the main github page: https://github.com/qgis/QGIS From there you have to find your way into releases: https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/releases And you have to guess that 2.2.0 is called final-2_2_0, which has a description of Version 2.2 (no patch-level) and no release notes. After some more research, I tried following the Older releases of QGIS link, from the ALL RELEASES tab in the download page, and finally found: http://qgis.org/downloads/, from which a more serious-looking package is found: http://qgis.org/downloads/qgis-2.2.0.tar.bz2 With it's signature: http://qgis.org/downloads/qgis-2.2.0.tar.bz2.md5 I think those two links should have been put into the announcement, plus a link to the release notes. Those are the apples on the ground, ready to be picked up by packagers that would wrap them in different boxes for different markets. The announcement mail could give more evidence to a WARNING: do not go to shops *tomorrow* as you're not likely to find them, but you're welcome to come and pick the apples from the ground, biological, at km 0 :) Having dealt with people confused about the release my opinion is this is bad publicity for the project. I'm not just making it up it's from experience and having t o deal with it. Confusion is never good. Myself I find qgis developers roles pretty confusing if they are expected to both produce the good and also give it different dresses for users of different markets. Where's the package for AmigaOS, btw ? Should we wait for ie before shipping those apples ? --strk; ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
On 27-06-14 08:45, Nyall Dawson wrote: Why can't we state that release is when windows + mac + ubuntu are ready? +1 from me. +1 from me with the combo: - source release is only announced on dev list - when wmu is packaged, we sent a mail to user/community list, update website and startup the marketing machine/twitter about it etc etc Regards, Richard Duivenvoorde ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
+1 from me for Richard's combo. On 2014/06/27 09:47, Richard Duivenvoorde wrote: On 27-06-14 08:45, Nyall Dawson wrote: Why can't we state that release is when windows + mac + ubuntu are ready? +1 from me. +1 from me with the combo: - source release is only announced on dev list - when wmu is packaged, we sent a mail to user/community list, update website and startup the marketing machine/twitter about it etc etc Regards, Richard Duivenvoorde ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer -- === Zoltan Szecsei PrGISc [PGP0031] Geograph (Pty) Ltd. GIS and Photogrammetric Services P.O. Box 7, Muizenberg 7950, South Africa. Mobile: +27-83-6004028 Fax:+27-86-6115323 www.geograph.co.za === ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
Hi, Le vendredi 27 juin 2014 09:47:55, Richard Duivenvoorde a écrit : On 27-06-14 08:45, Nyall Dawson wrote: Why can't we state that release is when windows + mac + ubuntu are ready? +1 from me. +1 from me with the combo: Agree with this, and to Nathan's demands. We should definitly get more information on our user base, gather statistics (anonymous, or through website stats), so that we can know what really matters to our users. We should not develop software for ourselves, but for people who really use it. And final polish is probably the most important part. Yes this includes taking care of the user, marketing, ergonomy, fine wording and many things developers do not want to do or are bad at doing. - source release is only announced on dev list - when wmu is packaged, we sent a mail to user/community list, update website and startup the marketing machine/twitter about it etc etc +1 then. Vincent ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
Hi Richard, On Fri, 27. Jun 2014 at 09:47:55 +0200, Richard Duivenvoorde wrote: +1 from me with the combo: - source release is only announced on dev list - when wmu is packaged, we sent a mail to user/community list, update website and startup the marketing machine/twitter about it etc etc Thanks for the support. I'll announce that the feature freeze is lifted from master as soon as the release is done - start with packaging and announce the release when my packages are ready (Debian, Ubuntu, ubuntugis, OSGeo4W, standalone; maybe later today). I trust that the other packagers are already prepared to start packaging after the release, know now, monitor github anyway or do their packages after they see the release announcement. But I won't avoid the term release on any commits ;) Jürgen -- Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-31 Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstraße 13Fax. +49-4931-918175-50 Software Engineer D-26506 Norden http://www.norbit.de QGIS PSC member (RM) Germany IRC: jef on FreeNode -- norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502 ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
[Qgis-developer] Release plans
Hi, With the impending release in the next day or so I would just like to clarify what the current plan is. 1) Are we planning on having packages ready to go before the official announcement? Personally I don't think it looks good to have nothing ready for download as soon as the email goes out because word spreads quick, people hit our site, find nothing, get annoyed, then we tell them ohh but you have to wait until we make packages. A release to us is tagged hash, to users it means packages ready to go. 2) Is the website going to be updated before/just after the announcement to point to the packages? 3) Are we holding the feature freeze for a month/two weeks after release in case something comes up that is a real hurt point to hold off on? If 2.4 release on the 27 is going to be just a email to call for packages, could it be just labeled as such, don't use the words Release, or QGIS 2.4 is out because it will go everywhere raising the issues in 1). I guess that is all, if the questions could be clarified that would be great. Regards, Nathan ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
On 06/26/2014 02:22 PM, Nathan Woodrow wrote: Hi, With the impending release in the next day or so I would just like to clarify what the current plan is. 1) Are we planning on having packages ready to go before the official announcement? It would be quite unfair for us, translators, as we have been promised that we have time until tomorrow morning. It wouldn't be very motivating for future. Personally I don't think it looks good to have nothing ready for download as soon as the email goes out because word spreads quick, people hit our site, find nothing, get annoyed, then we tell them ohh but you have to wait until we make packages. A release to us is tagged hash, to users it means packages ready to go. 2) Is the website going to be updated before/just after the announcement to point to the packages? 3) Are we holding the feature freeze for a month/two weeks after release in case something comes up that is a real hurt point to hold off on? If 2.4 release on the 27 is going to be just a email to call for packages, could it be just labeled as such, don't use the words Release, or QGIS 2.4 is out because it will go everywhere raising the issues in 1). I guess that is all, if the questions could be clarified that would be great. Regards, Nathan Regards, Kari -- Kari Salovaara Hanko, Finland Volunteers do not necessarily have the time; they just have the heart. ~ Elizabeth Andrew ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
Hi Nathan, On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 21:22:54 +1000, Nathan Woodrow wrote: 1) Are we planning on having packages ready to go before the official announcement? No. Just like with 2.2. 2) Is the website going to be updated before/just after the announcement to point to the packages? When the package arrive the website is going to be updated. Where necessary, not all links have an explicit version number in them. And we should probably also get rid of those that do - so we don't need to change that just because the current release version number changed. 3) Are we holding the feature freeze for a month/two weeks after release in case something comes up that is a real hurt point to hold off on? No. Once the release is branched and tagged, master is open for new features again. Just like with 2.2. Fixes can be applied to the release branch - although there still isn't an official plan if/when/how such updates would end up in packages. If 2.4 release on the 27 is going to be just a email to call for packages, could it be just labeled as such, don't use the words Release, or QGIS 2.4 is out because it will go everywhere raising the issues in 1). No, just like with 2.2 http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-user/2014-February/026281.html and as on the roadmap: http://qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/development/index.html#road-map Jürgen -- Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-31 Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstraße 13Fax. +49-4931-918175-50 Software Engineer D-26506 Norden http://www.norbit.de QGIS PSC member (RM) Germany IRC: jef on FreeNode -- norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502 ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
No. Just like with 2.2. I think this is a real mistake and bad PR for the project. If we want to do it like this we need to refine out release plan better to have things line up nice and smooth so people get what they expect. The user isn't us, we can build from source, they can not, nor should they. dev cylce - freeze - no new strings - 3 days out (or something) freeze all non package code incl strings - call packages/update versions/update site code etc - (on day) push website and packages - announcement. I suggest we need a calender on the website that shows using colors and date ranges what is happening and when so no one gets a shock. Here is what the current release feels like to a normal user who is coming from the outside: - Gets notified of the release (took about 10 seconds to go on twitter after you sent the 2.2 email that it was out so it was not a hidden thing, even on the weekend) - Gets excited - Heads to website - Ok banner still say 2.2 but there is a download link - Click download. - Run installer - oh 2.2. Didn't it say 2.4 was out? - *check back for later for you packages* How long do I have to wait? - * please come again* - (Never comes back) or is annoyed as heck - *meanwhile* - We push master forward, features flow in like normal. - Oh hi I found a major bug in 2.4 is there any planned patched release - Meh This is bad PR, even without the patched release thing, a release is a binary release to a user. A source tarball means nothing. I remember having to respond to a heap of annoyed people on the QGIS twitter/Facebook account with we are currently building package, please hold - Nathan On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Jürgen E. j...@norbit.de wrote: Hi Nathan, On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 21:22:54 +1000, Nathan Woodrow wrote: 1) Are we planning on having packages ready to go before the official announcement? No. Just like with 2.2. 2) Is the website going to be updated before/just after the announcement to point to the packages? When the package arrive the website is going to be updated. Where necessary, not all links have an explicit version number in them. And we should probably also get rid of those that do - so we don't need to change that just because the current release version number changed. 3) Are we holding the feature freeze for a month/two weeks after release in case something comes up that is a real hurt point to hold off on? No. Once the release is branched and tagged, master is open for new features again. Just like with 2.2. Fixes can be applied to the release branch - although there still isn't an official plan if/when/how such updates would end up in packages. If 2.4 release on the 27 is going to be just a email to call for packages, could it be just labeled as such, don't use the words Release, or QGIS 2.4 is out because it will go everywhere raising the issues in 1). No, just like with 2.2 http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-user/2014-February/026281.html and as on the roadmap: http://qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/development/index.html#road-map Jürgen -- Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-31 Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstraße 13Fax. +49-4931-918175-50 Software Engineer D-26506 Norden http://www.norbit.de QGIS PSC member (RM) Germany IRC: jef on FreeNode -- norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502 ___ 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
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
The close for translations pulled in is tomorrow at 11:30 UTC.. No changes in that.. As the source is released at 12:00 as 2.4.. Don't worry.. Your language updates will surely make it.. Regards Werner On 26 June 2014 13:34:20 Kari Salovaara kari.salova...@pp1.inet.fi wrote: On 06/26/2014 02:22 PM, Nathan Woodrow wrote: Hi, With the impending release in the next day or so I would just like to clarify what the current plan is. 1) Are we planning on having packages ready to go before the official announcement? It would be quite unfair for us, translators, as we have been promised that we have time until tomorrow morning. It wouldn't be very motivating for future. Personally I don't think it looks good to have nothing ready for download as soon as the email goes out because word spreads quick, people hit our site, find nothing, get annoyed, then we tell them ohh but you have to wait until we make packages. A release to us is tagged hash, to users it means packages ready to go. 2) Is the website going to be updated before/just after the announcement to point to the packages? 3) Are we holding the feature freeze for a month/two weeks after release in case something comes up that is a real hurt point to hold off on? If 2.4 release on the 27 is going to be just a email to call for packages, could it be just labeled as such, don't use the words Release, or QGIS 2.4 is out because it will go everywhere raising the issues in 1). I guess that is all, if the questions could be clarified that would be great. Regards, Nathan Regards, Kari -- Kari Salovaara Hanko, Finland Volunteers do not necessarily have the time; they just have the heart. ~ Elizabeth Andrew ___ 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
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
Hi Nathan, [Take 25] On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 22:32:01 +1000, Nathan Woodrow wrote: No. Just like with 2.2. I think this is a real mistake and bad PR for the project. If we want to do it like this we need to refine out release plan better to have things line up nice and smooth so people get what they expect. Why again a discussion on the last minute? The plans has been on display... The road map tells users what to expect. The announcement told users what to expect. If they still expect something else, that's their choice. But IMHO it's nothing that we need to take responsibility for. The current plan is easy. Just two dates: freeze and release. development before the freeze, testing, fixing, translating, release preparations after the freeze, packaging and new the next development cycle starts in parallel after the release. I think that's easy enough even without a colorful layout. Although the roadmap is hard to find on the website (but it's nowhere near alpha centauri). The user isn't us, we can build from source, they can not, nor should they. BTW the users are free to build from source, that's their choice, too. I think most of our users are pretty smart (and good looking) ;) Jürgen PS: This must be Thursday - and I put release on fridays intentionally to have the weekend for packaging... PPS: I wanted to tackle #10703 instead of this - you could have done #10589 ;) -- Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-31 Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstraße 13Fax. +49-4931-918175-50 Software Engineer D-26506 Norden http://www.norbit.de QGIS PSC member (RM) Germany IRC: jef on FreeNode -- norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502 ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
On 26.06.2014 16:07, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote: Hi Nathan, [Take 25] On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 22:32:01 +1000, Nathan Woodrow wrote: No. Just like with 2.2. I think this is a real mistake and bad PR for the project. If we want to do it like this we need to refine out release plan better to have things line up nice and smooth so people get what they expect. Why again a discussion on the last minute? The plans has been on display... The road map tells users what to expect. The announcement told users what to expect. If they still expect something else, that's their choice. But IMHO it's nothing that we need to take responsibility for. The current plan is easy. Just two dates: freeze and release. development before the freeze, testing, fixing, translating, release preparations after the freeze, packaging and new the next development cycle starts in parallel after the release. I think that's easy enough even without a colorful layout. Although the roadmap is hard to find on the website (but it's nowhere near alpha centauri). The user isn't us, we can build from source, they can not, nor should they. BTW the users are free to build from source, that's their choice, too. I think most of our users are pretty smart (and good looking) ;) I would bet that most people building from sources are not the ones waiting for an announced release. I agree with Nathan that it's a real bad idea to announce a release if people can't use it. If packaging is done during the weekend, I don't see a real problem to wait two days before annoucement. I would say that having the windows packages ready is a minimum before annoucement. Although, I agree it's a pity that we discuss 1 day to annoucement. This should be polished for next time, and I would vote for a more detailed calendar with * Feature freeze * String freeze * Code + Translation freeze * Packaging (at least win) * Release Cheers, Denis Jürgen PS: This must be Thursday - and I put release on fridays intentionally to have the weekend for packaging... PPS: I wanted to tackle #10703 instead of this - you could have done #10589 ;) ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
Hi I have to agree with Nathan and Denis. It would me buch better to announce a release when the packages are ready. I remember that last time there was some confusion and disappointment by users reading tweets that QGIS was available and then they could not install it on their platform. Sorry Jürgen that we discuss this at the very latest. I was already happy that we got one week more time for testing/bug fixing. At least for the next release we should have packages ready before the announcement. Or only inform developers about the release and then the regular users when the packages are ready. Andreas PS: hope Jürgen does not hate me now for all my requests/ideas ... Am 26.06.2014 12:32, schrieb Nathan Woodrow: No. Just like with 2.2. I think this is a real mistake and bad PR for the project. If we want to do it like this we need to refine out release plan better to have things line up nice and smooth so people get what they expect. The user isn't us, we can build from source, they can not, nor should they. dev cylce - freeze - no new strings - 3 days out (or something) freeze all non package code incl strings - call packages/update versions/update site code etc - (on day) push website and packages - announcement. I suggest we need a calender on the website that shows using colors and date ranges what is happening and when so no one gets a shock. Here is what the current release feels like to a normal user who is coming from the outside: - Gets notified of the release (took about 10 seconds to go on twitter after you sent the 2.2 email that it was out so it was not a hidden thing, even on the weekend) - Gets excited - Heads to website - Ok banner still say 2.2 but there is a download link - Click download. - Run installer - oh 2.2. Didn't it say 2.4 was out? - *check back for later for you packages* How long do I have to wait? - * please come again* - (Never comes back) or is annoyed as heck - *meanwhile* - We push master forward, features flow in like normal. - Oh hi I found a major bug in 2.4 is there any planned patched release - Meh This is bad PR, even without the patched release thing, a release is a binary release to a user. A source tarball means nothing. I remember having to respond to a heap of annoyed people on the QGIS twitter/Facebook account with we are currently building package, please hold - Nathan On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Jürgen E. j...@norbit.de wrote: Hi Nathan, On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 21:22:54 +1000, Nathan Woodrow wrote: 1) Are we planning on having packages ready to go before the official announcement? No. Just like with 2.2. 2) Is the website going to be updated before/just after the announcement to point to the packages? When the package arrive the website is going to be updated. Where necessary, not all links have an explicit version number in them. And we should probably also get rid of those that do - so we don't need to change that just because the current release version number changed. 3) Are we holding the feature freeze for a month/two weeks after release in case something comes up that is a real hurt point to hold off on? No. Once the release is branched and tagged, master is open for new features again. Just like with 2.2. Fixes can be applied to the release branch - although there still isn't an official plan if/when/how such updates would end up in packages. If 2.4 release on the 27 is going to be just a email to call for packages, could it be just labeled as such, don't use the words Release, or QGIS 2.4 is out because it will go everywhere raising the issues in 1). No, just like with 2.2 http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-user/2014-February/026281.html and as on the roadmap: http://qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/development/index.html#road-map Jürgen -- Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-31 Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstraße 13Fax. +49-4931-918175-50 Software Engineer D-26506 Norden http://www.norbit.de QGIS PSC member (RM) Germany IRC: jef on FreeNode -- norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502 ___ 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
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
I agree too for announcing when packages are ready. Right today, during a course, I was answering a partecipant wh asked be about the next release. I've told him it will happen in a few days and I ansewered: I hope they don't do as for QGIS 2.2, when we had to go back to the website more and mroe times, hoping to see the QGIS 2.4 download link appear... giovanni 2014-06-26 16:43 GMT+02:00 Andreas Neumann a.neum...@carto.net: Hi I have to agree with Nathan and Denis. It would me buch better to announce a release when the packages are ready. I remember that last time there was some confusion and disappointment by users reading tweets that QGIS was available and then they could not install it on their platform. Sorry Jürgen that we discuss this at the very latest. I was already happy that we got one week more time for testing/bug fixing. At least for the next release we should have packages ready before the announcement. Or only inform developers about the release and then the regular users when the packages are ready. Andreas PS: hope Jürgen does not hate me now for all my requests/ideas ... Am 26.06.2014 12:32, schrieb Nathan Woodrow: No. Just like with 2.2. I think this is a real mistake and bad PR for the project. If we want to do it like this we need to refine out release plan better to have things line up nice and smooth so people get what they expect. The user isn't us, we can build from source, they can not, nor should they. dev cylce - freeze - no new strings - 3 days out (or something) freeze all non package code incl strings - call packages/update versions/update site code etc - (on day) push website and packages - announcement. I suggest we need a calender on the website that shows using colors and date ranges what is happening and when so no one gets a shock. Here is what the current release feels like to a normal user who is coming from the outside: - Gets notified of the release (took about 10 seconds to go on twitter after you sent the 2.2 email that it was out so it was not a hidden thing, even on the weekend) - Gets excited - Heads to website - Ok banner still say 2.2 but there is a download link - Click download. - Run installer - oh 2.2. Didn't it say 2.4 was out? - *check back for later for you packages* How long do I have to wait? - * please come again* - (Never comes back) or is annoyed as heck - *meanwhile* - We push master forward, features flow in like normal. - Oh hi I found a major bug in 2.4 is there any planned patched release - Meh This is bad PR, even without the patched release thing, a release is a binary release to a user. A source tarball means nothing. I remember having to respond to a heap of annoyed people on the QGIS twitter/Facebook account with we are currently building package, please hold - Nathan On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Jürgen E. j...@norbit.de wrote: Hi Nathan, On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 21:22:54 +1000, Nathan Woodrow wrote: 1) Are we planning on having packages ready to go before the official announcement? No. Just like with 2.2. 2) Is the website going to be updated before/just after the announcement to point to the packages? When the package arrive the website is going to be updated. Where necessary, not all links have an explicit version number in them. And we should probably also get rid of those that do - so we don't need to change that just because the current release version number changed. 3) Are we holding the feature freeze for a month/two weeks after release in case something comes up that is a real hurt point to hold off on? No. Once the release is branched and tagged, master is open for new features again. Just like with 2.2. Fixes can be applied to the release branch - although there still isn't an official plan if/when/how such updates would end up in packages. If 2.4 release on the 27 is going to be just a email to call for packages, could it be just labeled as such, don't use the words Release, or QGIS 2.4 is out because it will go everywhere raising the issues in 1). No, just like with 2.2 http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-user/2014-February/026281.html and as on the roadmap: http://qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/development/index.html#road-map Jürgen -- Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-31 Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstraße 13Fax. +49-4931-918175-50 Software Engineer D-26506 Norden http://www.norbit.de QGIS PSC member (RM) Germany IRC: jef on FreeNode -- norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502 ___ Qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
Hi Andreas, On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 14:43:19 +, Andreas Neumann wrote: I have to agree with Nathan and Denis. It would me buch better to announce a release when the packages are ready. I remember that last time there was some confusion and disappointment by users reading tweets that QGIS was available and then they could not install it on their platform. That was the first time - it might have come unexpected to the user. They'll probably get used to it. Sorry Jürgen that we discuss this at the very latest. I was already happy that we got one week more time for testing/bug fixing. At least for the next release we should have packages ready before the announcement. Or only inform developers about the release and then the regular users when the packages are ready. Which packages? OSGeo4W? Windows standalone? Debian? Ubuntu? Ubuntugis? Fedora? RHEL/CentOS/SL? OpenSUSE, Mandriva? Slackware? ArchLinux? OSX? FreeBSD? Android? All? Some/which? How long do we wait? I rather get the (source) release done, get my packages done (a good share of the above) and then get back to master... Jürgen -- Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-31 Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstraße 13Fax. +49-4931-918175-50 Software Engineer D-26506 Norden http://www.norbit.de QGIS PSC member (RM) Germany IRC: jef on FreeNode -- norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502 ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
On 26.06.2014 17:02, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote: Hi Andreas, On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 14:43:19 +, Andreas Neumann wrote: I have to agree with Nathan and Denis. It would me buch better to announce a release when the packages are ready. I remember that last time there was some confusion and disappointment by users reading tweets that QGIS was available and then they could not install it on their platform. That was the first time - it might have come unexpected to the user. They'll probably get used to it. Sorry Jürgen that we discuss this at the very latest. I was already happy that we got one week more time for testing/bug fixing. At least for the next release we should have packages ready before the announcement. Or only inform developers about the release and then the regular users when the packages are ready. Which packages? OSGeo4W? Windows standalone? Debian? Ubuntu? Ubuntugis? Fedora? RHEL/CentOS/SL? OpenSUSE, Mandriva? Slackware? ArchLinux? OSX? FreeBSD? Android? All? Some/which? How long do we wait? As said, I think Windows is the limiting factor. I am not sure about Mac. But that would be the only two. For the rest, a packaging...coming soon! message will do the job! I rather get the (source) release done, get my packages done (a good share of the above) and then get back to master... Jürgen ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
Hi Giovanni, On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 17:02:57 +0200, G. Allegri wrote: I agree too for announcing when packages are ready. Right today, during a course, I was answering a partecipant wh asked be about the next release. I've told him it will happen in a few days and I ansewered: I hope they don't do as for QGIS 2.2, when we had to go back to the website more and mroe times, hoping to see the QGIS 2.4 download link appear... Looks like announcing the (source) release on qgis-developer and announcing individual packages on qgis-user would solve that problem. I also don't like to have stuff on my queue, that I can't do anything about than just be patient. Actually that's exactly why I want the (completion of) the packaging out of the release schedule. To me there's not much point in having master frozen, while everyone is just waiting for packages to be built. Jürgen -- Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-31 Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstraße 13Fax. +49-4931-918175-50 Software Engineer D-26506 Norden http://www.norbit.de QGIS PSC member (RM) Germany IRC: jef on FreeNode -- norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502 ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
Il 26/06/2014 17:27, Jürgen E. Fischer ha scritto:
Looks like announcing the (source) release on qgis-developer and announcing
individual packages on qgis-user would solve that problem.
IMHO:
1. do not change anything in the relase schedule just one day before
2. announcements should be clear: (a) QGIS 2.4 is out, wait for packages; (b)
package
for {Debian|Ubuntu|whatever} is ready, go and download it from http://...
This should make everyone happy.
I like the idea our users understand more of the work it is being done, and do
not
take tha packages for granted.
All the best.
--
Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
Corsi QGIS e PostGIS: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
Hi All, I agree with Denis and Nathan on the general idea, and also with Paolo on don't change things on day before. From a user point of view, I can live 2.2 behaviour, since I already have seen what release meant for qgis project in 2.2. But, I think 2.6 should go to a more common definition of release, ie package release. Do we have download stats of packages to clarify the minimum list of package to include in that release? To me , Windows, Ubuntu and MacOS should be the minimal list. Advanced users of other distros are much more accustomed with compiling process and are probably better understanding the difference between source code and package . you're doing all great work, don't let the pressure rise ;-). Sorry for not having been able to support the final debug, release and translation process that time... Hope I'll find a way to do that in the future. Régis -- View this message in context: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Release-plans-tp5148090p5148188.html Sent from the Quantum GIS - Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
I am aware it was a late email, I have been busy on non qgis jobs and
haven't been able to look side ways.
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Paolo Cavallini cavall...@faunalia.it
wrote:
1. do not change anything in the relase schedule just one day before
2. announcements should be clear: (a) QGIS 2.4 is out, wait for packages;
(b) package
for {Debian|Ubuntu|whatever} is ready, go and download it from http://...
1. Surly it's not hard to build the package an two hours or so before the
release and have it ready go, even if this a last minute call. As much as
it pains people Windows is our biggest user base so they need to be there,
followed by Debian, then OS X.
2) There is no different for a user between a) and b) a release is a
binary release like I said. Making it a two stage process is just
confusing and annoying to users. Trying to make people understand the
process by doing this isn't really right IMO. Users don't need to care
how packages are built or how long it takes, the people that know or need
too tend to be involved at the project level anyway. Users just need a
package to install on release day, a source release is like say yay
release!But no you can't have it because your just a user you have to
wait.
Jürgen,
Looks like announcing the (source) release on qgis-developer and announcing
individual packages on qgis-user would solve that problem.
This will make no difference, people watch the dev list especially around
release time for news. Once you announce any kind of release, source or
not, you have lost the ability to control where it will go and what people
expect. Just watch how quick it will hit twitter, and then watch as people
get confused why there is no download. It's mainly wording, it's all in the
wording.
People really like our software and some are super excited about the
release, to not have packages for download really looks bad IMO.
To me there's not much point in having master frozen, while everyone is just
waiting for packages to be built.
That is why I said it would only be a day or so before release, it
shouldn't take more then day to build a package for any of the major
platforms and update the site. All we would have to do is branch the code a
day out, package, release. If you push something non package related on
that last day before the release then it will just have to wait until next
release, or a patched release. People can't be pushing fixes last second as
that is just dangerous.
That was the first time - it might have come unexpected to the user.
They'll
probably get used to it..
They shouldn't that is the point I'm making. We don't expect that with
other things. If I see a new release of Python is out and I go to the site
and don't see a binary package it will be a long while before I go back I
have other things to be doing.
I rather get the (source) release done, get my packages done (a good share
of
the above) and then get back to master...
I understand, just don't call it a release. Branch it today and call it a
call for packages (don't use the word out or release), wait a few
days then binary release. You and I know what a source release is, users
don't care. We really need some stats on our user base so we know what
platforms are our major target ones.
This raises the question how quickly are you expecting to have major
packages done? If we source release tonight but don't have packages ready
by Monday, Tuesday, there is 4 days of people hitting our site with no way
to download the packages and this looks really bad.
Why not call for packages today, let people get sorted over the weekend,
update the site, release on Monday, Tuesday?
I know it sounds like a rant, because it kind of is, but I really enjoy
working on the project, the package is great, the people are great, but I
find this current release process stressful and I'm not one calling the
release. Stressful because I know we have a lot of users who love our
stuff but can't get it when we say it's out.
If you don't want to change it for this release, OK, but I think we need to
review it for the next release so everyone is on the same page. There are
are other large projects we can steal the process from.
- Nathan
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 09:03:08AM +1000, Nathan Woodrow wrote: a source release is like say yay release!But no you can't have it because your just a user you have to wait. You don't have to wait. You can have it now if you want. If you decided to give up your freedom for convenience, you can wait for someone to also bring you a chair and a pillow. On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 05:27:20PM +0200, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote: Looks like announcing the (source) release on qgis-developer and announcing individual packages on qgis-user would solve that problem. Agreed about splitting the announcement, althought I'd also announce source release on qgis-user. I don't think hiding existance of sources brings any benefit in the users community. This will make no difference, people watch the dev list especially around release time for news. Once you announce any kind of release, source or not, you have lost the ability to control where it will go and what people expect. Just watch how quick it will hit twitter, and then watch as people get confused why there is no download. It's mainly wording, it's all in the wording. I agree about wording being important. Announcing source release should have a link to the source tarball. Binary releases might even not need to be announced by the qgis team, as serious package managers conveniently implement those announces with user popups and the like... People really like our software and some are super excited about the release, to not have packages for download really looks bad IMO. There'll be a source package for download, so those that do not need a binary package don't have to wait to use it. And those that do _build_ binary packages (for systems you may not even know exist) have a way to download it and build their packages. I know we have a lot of users who love our stuff but can't get it when we say it's out. They _can_ get it, it may just be not yet wrapped the way which is more comfortable for them. They only need to be informed about what's available and what not. It's like saying you can't say apples are ripe! because then people get frustrated by not finding them on their supermarket shelf. Nature's PSC: people love apples, stop making them fall on the ground ! --strk; () ASCII ribbon campaign -- Keep it simple ! /\ http://strk.keybit.net/rants/ascii_mails.txt ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
[Qgis-developer] Release plans
Hi all. Tim, could you please update us on the plans for 2.0 release? We are ready to help if necessary. All the best. -- Paolo Cavallini - Faunalia www.faunalia.eu Full contact details at www.faunalia.eu/pc Nuovi corsi QGIS e PostGIS: http://www.faunalia.it/calendario ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans for 1.7.1
Hi On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 1:57 PM, luca_mangane...@comune.trento.it wrote: qgis-developer-boun...@lists.osgeo.org scritti il 23/08/2011 21.19.36 Hi All I would like to put out a maintenance release of the 1.7 branch at the end of this month. There won't be too much activity surrounding the release as the branch is in feature freeze. There may have been some small string changes so it would be good if the translators could give the branch a quick once over. I am behind a couple of weeks on checking the application of backportable code, but I will be going over the last few weeks of commits and backporting anything relevant to the release branch. If you have applied bug fixes to master, it would be great if you could help me to make sure they have also been applied to the release branch. It would be nice to release 1.7.1 version with only bugfixes and no new features. Yes that is the intention! :-) 8--snip-- -- Tim Sutton - QGIS Project Steering Committee Member (Release Manager) == Please do not email me off-list with technical support questions. Using the lists will gain more exposure for your issues and the knowledge surrounding your issue will be shared with all. Visit http://linfiniti.com to find out about: * QGIS programming and support services * Mapserver and PostGIS based hosting plans * FOSS Consulting Services Skype: timlinux Irc: timlinux on #qgis at freenode.net == ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
[Qgis-developer] Release plans for 1.7.1
Hi All I would like to put out a maintenance release of the 1.7 branch at the end of this month. There won't be too much activity surrounding the release as the branch is in feature freeze. There may have been some small string changes so it would be good if the translators could give the branch a quick once over. I am behind a couple of weeks on checking the application of backportable code, but I will be going over the last few weeks of commits and backporting anything relevant to the release branch. If you have applied bug fixes to master, it would be great if you could help me to make sure they have also been applied to the release branch. Regards -- Tim Sutton - QGIS Project Steering Committee Member (Release Manager) == Please do not email me off-list with technical support questions. Using the lists will gain more exposure for your issues and the knowledge surrounding your issue will be shared with all. Visit http://linfiniti.com to find out about: * QGIS programming and support services * Mapserver and PostGIS based hosting plans * FOSS Consulting Services Skype: timlinux Irc: timlinux on #qgis at freenode.net == ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans for QGIS 1.6
New Zealand Taumatawhakatangihangakoauauotamateaturipuk akapikimaungahoronukupokaiwhenuakitanatahu was also not bad... ;) (TRANSLATION: “The brow of the hill where Tamatea, with the bony knees, slid and climbed mountains. The great traveler sat and played on the flute to his beloved.”) On Mon, 2010-10-18 at 07:44 +0200, Tim Sutton wrote: Hi Ok I went with Giovanni's suggestion of Capiopo for this release - see the new splash screen in trunk. Regards Tim On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Benoit de Cabissole ben...@exigesa.com wrote: On 17/10/2010 10:37, Tim Sutton wrote: Hi On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Vincent Leong loldog2...@gmail.com wrote: How about hill names as release names? Hills is better than mountains because mountains is always too well known and probably been used by others. Moreover, their shape can be used to differentiate releases. One example: Bohol Any nice pics to go with your suggestion? I quite like the idea since philosophically each release is another hill we have climbed and put behind us :-) Or characteristics contour lines of the hill (we are dealing with GIS after all)? My 2 cents Benoit Lets keep the discussion on-list ok? Regards Tim On 10/17/10, Tim Sutton li...@linfiniti.com wrote: Hi On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 1:07 AM, Alex Mandel tech_...@wildintellect.com wrote: I agree that real place names is a better idea. I could see lots of Mythical/Fictitious names actually being claimed by people. I will also point out that the Mozilla Foundation uses National Parks/Reserves in the code naming of pre-release firefox branches and suggest that we could do something with a greater cause as our release names: Endangered Species, World Heritage Sites, Rivers, Mountain Peaks, etc.. (suggest your idea) Sorry in retrospect my original email was probably unclear. It was my intention that we use *real* (hence photographable) place names, but obscure ones that a) have some geographical interest and b) are unlikely to ever have been used by someone as a trademark. Having a theme to the place names would be fine (making them really obscure and interesting was kind of my idea for a theme, but another theme would be fine too). Using well known places e.g. Moscow as Maxim suggests will lead to similar conflicts as using planetary moons. Regards Tim We could also de-emphasize the release name and use it amongst the developer group to keep track of what's being worked on, ie the trunk will have a name leading up to it's release and then switch names. I also agree, to just avoid the issue as it's not worth our effort to fight. Thanks, Alex On 10/16/2010 03:06 PM, Maxim Dubinin wrote: How about making release names geographic. QGIS 1.6 Moscow sounds good and easily memorizable. Maxim Вы писали 16 октября 2010 г., 14:07:10: TS Hi TS On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 8:09 PM, Jürgen E. j...@norbit.de wrote: Hi Tim, On Sat, 16. Oct 2010 at 01:42:54 +0200, Tim Sutton wrote: We (the PSC) recently received a threat of legal action against our use of the word 'Tethys' in the naming of the 1.5 release of QGIS. It seems that the word Tethys is trademarked by a company in one country. Although we feel their case is weak, we do not have the time, money or inclination to engage in a legal battle over this. Does OSGeo have a position on this? I thought the OSGeo umbrella was also covering legal support. Just curious - that would probably be a waste of time of resources anyway. TS Ok Frank covered that. And yeah we should pick our battles... This has a few implications: - The PSC has agreed to stop using planetary moons as the names for our releases, and embark on a new theme of using extremely obscure place names (e.g. the mythical Tweebuffelsmeteenskootgeskietfontein in South Africa). Do we need codenames at all? Any name - obscure or not - could be a trademark. TS *sniff* lose the release names? That would be no funshould we let TS big corporations take away our fun? :-P TS But yeah theoretically we don't need them, though personally I'd like TS to continue with them... TS Regards TS Tim Jürgen -- Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-20 Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstraße 13Fax. +49-4931-918175-50 Software Engineer D-26506 Norden http://www.norbit.de ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer -- Tim Sutton - QGIS Project Steering Committee Member (Release Manager) == Please do not email me off-list with technical support questions. Using the lists will gain more exposure for your
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans for QGIS 1.6
Hi Ok I went with Giovanni's suggestion of Capiopo for this release - see the new splash screen in trunk. Regards Tim On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Benoit de Cabissole ben...@exigesa.com wrote: On 17/10/2010 10:37, Tim Sutton wrote: Hi On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Vincent Leong loldog2...@gmail.com wrote: How about hill names as release names? Hills is better than mountains because mountains is always too well known and probably been used by others. Moreover, their shape can be used to differentiate releases. One example: Bohol Any nice pics to go with your suggestion? I quite like the idea since philosophically each release is another hill we have climbed and put behind us :-) Or characteristics contour lines of the hill (we are dealing with GIS after all)? My 2 cents Benoit Lets keep the discussion on-list ok? Regards Tim On 10/17/10, Tim Sutton li...@linfiniti.com wrote: Hi On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 1:07 AM, Alex Mandel tech_...@wildintellect.com wrote: I agree that real place names is a better idea. I could see lots of Mythical/Fictitious names actually being claimed by people. I will also point out that the Mozilla Foundation uses National Parks/Reserves in the code naming of pre-release firefox branches and suggest that we could do something with a greater cause as our release names: Endangered Species, World Heritage Sites, Rivers, Mountain Peaks, etc.. (suggest your idea) Sorry in retrospect my original email was probably unclear. It was my intention that we use *real* (hence photographable) place names, but obscure ones that a) have some geographical interest and b) are unlikely to ever have been used by someone as a trademark. Having a theme to the place names would be fine (making them really obscure and interesting was kind of my idea for a theme, but another theme would be fine too). Using well known places e.g. Moscow as Maxim suggests will lead to similar conflicts as using planetary moons. Regards Tim We could also de-emphasize the release name and use it amongst the developer group to keep track of what's being worked on, ie the trunk will have a name leading up to it's release and then switch names. I also agree, to just avoid the issue as it's not worth our effort to fight. Thanks, Alex On 10/16/2010 03:06 PM, Maxim Dubinin wrote: How about making release names geographic. QGIS 1.6 Moscow sounds good and easily memorizable. Maxim Вы писали 16 октября 2010 г., 14:07:10: TS Hi TS On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 8:09 PM, Jürgen E. j...@norbit.de wrote: Hi Tim, On Sat, 16. Oct 2010 at 01:42:54 +0200, Tim Sutton wrote: We (the PSC) recently received a threat of legal action against our use of the word 'Tethys' in the naming of the 1.5 release of QGIS. It seems that the word Tethys is trademarked by a company in one country. Although we feel their case is weak, we do not have the time, money or inclination to engage in a legal battle over this. Does OSGeo have a position on this? I thought the OSGeo umbrella was also covering legal support. Just curious - that would probably be a waste of time of resources anyway. TS Ok Frank covered that. And yeah we should pick our battles... This has a few implications: - The PSC has agreed to stop using planetary moons as the names for our releases, and embark on a new theme of using extremely obscure place names (e.g. the mythical Tweebuffelsmeteenskootgeskietfontein in South Africa). Do we need codenames at all? Any name - obscure or not - could be a trademark. TS *sniff* lose the release names? That would be no funshould we let TS big corporations take away our fun? :-P TS But yeah theoretically we don't need them, though personally I'd like TS to continue with them... TS Regards TS Tim Jürgen -- Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-20 Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstraße 13 Fax. +49-4931-918175-50 Software Engineer D-26506 Norden http://www.norbit.de ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer -- Tim Sutton - QGIS Project Steering Committee Member (Release Manager) == Please do not email me off-list with technical support questions. Using the lists will gain more exposure for your issues and the knowledge surrounding your issue will be shared with all. Visit http://linfiniti.com to find out about: * QGIS programming and support services * Mapserver and PostGIS based hosting plans * FOSS Consulting Services Skype: timlinux Irc: timlinux on #qgis at freenode.net == ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans for QGIS 1.6
Hi Tim, On Sat, 16. Oct 2010 at 01:42:54 +0200, Tim Sutton wrote: We (the PSC) recently received a threat of legal action against our use of the word 'Tethys' in the naming of the 1.5 release of QGIS. It seems that the word Tethys is trademarked by a company in one country. Although we feel their case is weak, we do not have the time, money or inclination to engage in a legal battle over this. Does OSGeo have a position on this? I thought the OSGeo umbrella was also covering legal support. Just curious - that would probably be a waste of time of resources anyway. This has a few implications: - The PSC has agreed to stop using planetary moons as the names for our releases, and embark on a new theme of using extremely obscure place names (e.g. the mythical Tweebuffelsmeteenskootgeskietfontein in South Africa). Do we need codenames at all? Any name - obscure or not - could be a trademark. Jürgen -- Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-20 Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstraße 13Fax. +49-4931-918175-50 Software Engineer D-26506 Norden http://www.norbit.de -- norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502 ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans for QGIS 1.6
Jürgen E. Fischer wrote: Hi Tim, On Sat, 16. Oct 2010 at 01:42:54 +0200, Tim Sutton wrote: We (the PSC) recently received a threat of legal action against our use of the word 'Tethys' in the naming of the 1.5 release of QGIS. It seems that the word Tethys is trademarked by a company in one country. Although we feel their case is weak, we do not have the time, money or inclination to engage in a legal battle over this. Does OSGeo have a position on this? I thought the OSGeo umbrella was also covering legal support. Jürgen, We don't have legal resources on call and it could get quite expensive to retain legal support so we very much lean towards avoiding legal conflict. However, if the need is there the board would consider resourcing legal support for the projects. Best regards, -- ---+-- I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmer...@pobox.com light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam and watch the world go round - Rush| Geospatial Programmer for Rent ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [Qgis-developer] Release plans for QGIS 1.6
I agree that real place names is a better idea. I could see lots of Mythical/Fictitious names actually being claimed by people. I will also point out that the Mozilla Foundation uses National Parks/Reserves in the code naming of pre-release firefox branches and suggest that we could do something with a greater cause as our release names: Endangered Species, World Heritage Sites, Rivers, Mountain Peaks, etc.. (suggest your idea) We could also de-emphasize the release name and use it amongst the developer group to keep track of what's being worked on, ie the trunk will have a name leading up to it's release and then switch names. I also agree, to just avoid the issue as it's not worth our effort to fight. Thanks, Alex On 10/16/2010 03:06 PM, Maxim Dubinin wrote: How about making release names geographic. QGIS 1.6 Moscow sounds good and easily memorizable. Maxim Вы писали 16 октября 2010 г., 14:07:10: TS Hi TS On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 8:09 PM, Jürgen E. j...@norbit.de wrote: Hi Tim, On Sat, 16. Oct 2010 at 01:42:54 +0200, Tim Sutton wrote: We (the PSC) recently received a threat of legal action against our use of the word 'Tethys' in the naming of the 1.5 release of QGIS. It seems that the word Tethys is trademarked by a company in one country. Although we feel their case is weak, we do not have the time, money or inclination to engage in a legal battle over this. Does OSGeo have a position on this? I thought the OSGeo umbrella was also covering legal support. Just curious - that would probably be a waste of time of resources anyway. TS Ok Frank covered that. And yeah we should pick our battles... This has a few implications: - The PSC has agreed to stop using planetary moons as the names for our releases, and embark on a new theme of using extremely obscure place names (e.g. the mythical Tweebuffelsmeteenskootgeskietfontein in South Africa). Do we need codenames at all? Any name - obscure or not - could be a trademark. TS *sniff* lose the release names? That would be no funshould we let TS big corporations take away our fun? :-P TS But yeah theoretically we don't need them, though personally I'd like TS to continue with them... TS Regards TS Tim Jürgen -- Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-20 Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstraße 13Fax. +49-4931-918175-50 Software Engineer D-26506 Norden http://www.norbit.de ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
