Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Hi Nyall, You just beat me on the same email a few minutes away :-) > - Get PSC to vote on and accept > https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals/issues/29 . Needs > to be done ASAP so that we're all agreed that 2.14 is the last 2.0 > series release. +1 > - Decide on the timing for

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

On 25 October 2015 at 22:03, Matthias Kuhn wrote: > > On 10/25/2015 08:23 AM, Nathan Woodrow wrote: >> >> Of course we can develop it without breaking anything if done in a >> branch. But having a plan around all this is the point of all this I >> think just so we are all on

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

+1 Tim can I get a vote for QEP 29 setup on the platform we are using please. ( https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals/issues/29) On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 7:04 AM, Nyall Dawson wrote: > On 25 October 2015 at 22:03, Matthias Kuhn wrote: >

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Hi Nyall, On Fri, 11. Dec 2015 at 08:04:09 +1100, Nyall Dawson wrote: > I'd like to get this discussion moving again, since timing is critical. Isn't that backwards? I think we need to start with the work, see how it goes and then decide when it's ready to be merged - and maybe make plans

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

2015-10-24 10:51 GMT+02:00 Paolo Cavallini : > Il 23/10/2015 21:04, Hugo Mercier ha scritto: > > Hi, > > I also like the idea of a list dedicated to plugins and plugin > development. > > Maybe this could be integrated into plugins.qgis.org. > elpaso, how do you feel about

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Of course we can develop it without breaking anything if done in a branch. But having a plan around all this is the point of all this I think just so we are all on the same page On Sun, 25 Oct 2015 5:11 pm Matthias Kuhn wrote: > > On 10/24/2015 09:13 PM, Nyall Dawson wrote:

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

On 10/24/2015 09:13 PM, Nyall Dawson wrote: > > But keeping the possibility of merging the branch before 2.14 means > the api is locked... That's not ideal, it'll create a lot of > (unneeded) extra work. I'd say allow breaks in the branch, merge after > 2.14. > Why does that mean that the API is

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

On 10/25/2015 08:23 AM, Nathan Woodrow wrote: > > Of course we can develop it without breaking anything if done in a > branch. But having a plan around all this is the point of all this I > think just so we are all on the same page > > We do (most likely) not need to keep it in a separate

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Il 24/10/2015 13:07, Tom Chadwin ha scritto: >> What would then be the difference between 2.14 and a 2.12 LTR? > > 2.14LTR is what the roadmap says. 2.12LTR isn't. OK, I see: disallowing major changes != allowing bugfix only. I believe this can be acceptable for most, maybe all, users. All the

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

lists.osgeo.org> Objet : [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14 Date : sam., oct. 24, 2015 13:20 On 24 Oct 2015 22:06, "Paolo Cavallini" <cavall...@faunalia.it> wrote: > > Il 24/10/2015 12:57, Nyall Dawson ha scritto: > > > We do have to k

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

On 10/24/2015 02:15 PM, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote: > Hi Matthias, > > On Sat, 24. Oct 2015 at 13:45:02 +0200, Matthias Kuhn wrote: >> Can we not just develop in a separate branch, merge features back into master >> whenever they are ready. Be it before or after release of 2.14 LTR. > Right, sounds

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

What ever we do we just can't break plugins unless it's planned out and all in one go to reduce the number of updates that need to be done On Sun, 25 Oct 2015 8:11 am Jürgen E. wrote: > Hi Nyall, > > On Sun, 25. Oct 2015 at 06:13:22 +1100, Nyall Dawson wrote: > > But keeping the

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

On 24 Oct 2015 23:17, "Jürgen E." wrote: > > Hi Matthias, > > On Sat, 24. Oct 2015 at 13:45:02 +0200, Matthias Kuhn wrote: > > Can we not just develop in a separate branch, merge features back into master > > whenever they are ready. Be it before or after release of 2.14 LTR. > >

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Paolo always does question new plugins if they duplicate. Is that not enough? It's the reason my plugin was created. Our is there perhaps a historical issue? -- View this message in context: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/QEP-Proposal-for-QGIS-3-0-after-2-14-tp5231556p5232337.html Sent

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

The plugin mailing list should be equivalent to this list and the users one. Additional integration into the plugins site would be an extra, but not required. I don't think that occasional emails to plugin devs via the emails associated in the repo would be unreasonable. Perhaps three or four

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

On 24 Oct 2015 19:55, "Paolo Cavallini" wrote: > > Il 24/10/2015 01:24, Nyall Dawson ha scritto: > > > My concern with this approach would be that we'd need to make sure > > it's known that major changes aren't acceptable for 2.14. If 2.14 was > > I think this is

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

On 24 Oct 2015 22:06, "Paolo Cavallini" wrote: > > Il 24/10/2015 12:57, Nyall Dawson ha scritto: > > > We do have to keep SOME say in the release plans/schedule... I don't > > think we can satisfy everyone and even sponsors need to fit in with the > > bigger picture. > > >

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Hi On 10/24/2015 01:27 PM, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote: > Hi Mathieu, > > On Sat, 24. Oct 2015 at 09:44:31 +0700, Mathieu Pellerin wrote: >> On a psychological level, as the heavy development of new features has in the >> past mostly taken place on the master branch, it'd make it clearer to devs >>

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

lists.osgeo.org> Objet : [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14 Date : sam., oct. 24, 2015 13:20 On 24 Oct 2015 22:06, "Paolo Cavallini" <cavall...@faunalia.it> wrote: > > Il 24/10/2015 12:57, Nyall Dawson ha scritto: > > > We do have to k

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Il 23/10/2015 21:04, Hugo Mercier ha scritto: > Hi, > I also like the idea of a list dedicated to plugins and plugin development. Maybe this could be integrated into plugins.qgis.org. elpaso, how do you feel about that? Implementing a way to send anuoncement to all plugin authors and maintainers

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Hi Mathieu, On Sat, 24. Oct 2015 at 09:44:31 +0700, Mathieu Pellerin wrote: > On a psychological level, as the heavy development of new features has in the > past mostly taken place on the master branch, it'd make it clearer to devs > that the heavy feature development takes place there, and not

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

On 24 Oct 2015 21:51, "Paolo Cavallini" wrote: > > Il 24/10/2015 12:47, Nyall Dawson ha scritto: > > > No, that's not correct. Current thinking is 2.14 on schedule with only > > minor changes/bug fixes, then 3.0 with api break, etc & major new > > features 4 months later. >

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Il 24/10/2015 12:57, Nyall Dawson ha scritto: > We do have to keep SOME say in the release plans/schedule... I don't > think we can satisfy everyone and even sponsors need to fit in with the > bigger picture. > > I'm also sure there's a lot of commercial sponsors out there who would > love the

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

lists.osgeo.org> Objet : [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14 Date : sam., oct. 24, 2015 13:20 On 24 Oct 2015 22:06, "Paolo Cavallini" <cavall...@faunalia.it> wrote: > > Il 24/10/2015 12:57, Nyall Dawson ha scritto: > > > We do have to k

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Il 24/10/2015 01:24, Nyall Dawson ha scritto: > My concern with this approach would be that we'd need to make sure > it's known that major changes aren't acceptable for 2.14. If 2.14 was I think this is problematic, as it would mean no new stuff for about one year, something unacceptable for

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Il 24/10/2015 12:47, Nyall Dawson ha scritto: > No, that's not correct. Current thinking is 2.14 on schedule with only > minor changes/bug fixes, then 3.0 with api break, etc & major new > features 4 months later. > > So at most 8 months wait for a major intrusive feature. I think that's >

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

> What would then be the difference between 2.14 and a 2.12 LTR? 2.14LTR is what the roadmap says. 2.12LTR isn't. -- View this message in context: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/QEP-Proposal-for-QGIS-3-0-after-2-14-tp5231556p5232326.html Sent from the Quantum GIS - Developer mailing list

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Hi Matthias, On Sat, 24. Oct 2015 at 13:45:02 +0200, Matthias Kuhn wrote: > Can we not just develop in a separate branch, merge features back into master > whenever they are ready. Be it before or after release of 2.14 LTR. Right, sounds like what I intended to say ;) > I am afraid that working

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Hi, On 22/10/2015 18:01, Larry Shaffer wrote: > > > Hmm. You mean put in a QEP tomorrow, and ask the PSC to vote on that > early next week? I would think at least a week of dev community comments > on such a QEP would be warranted, given the very large scope. > > Maybe ask Jürgen and PSC for

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Hi, I also like the idea of a list dedicated to plugins and plugin development. On 21/10/2015 12:59, Tom Chadwin wrote: > The potential downside is fragmentation of the users across too many lists - > specifically, would we lose some subscribers to the dev list? Anyway, I'm in > no position to

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Hi, On 21/10/2015 17:01, Matthias Kuhn wrote: > The most important thing would probably be to have a working > implementation for > > * PyQt5 > * Python3 > > If it is possible to merge support for this in the current codebase - > just like it's currently possible with Qt5 - we can start to

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

As Jürgen said, it's essentially the same. Yet... :) I also think branching off 2.14 LTR now is slightly preferable. On a psychological level, as the heavy development of new features has in the past mostly taken place on the master branch, it'd make it clearer to devs that the heavy feature

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Hi, On Thu, 22. Oct 2015 at 08:47:26 +1100, Nyall Dawson wrote: > Why not: - Branch off a qt5 branch from master now and start with porting - continue as usual with master to produce 2.14 - branch 2.14 off and release it in four month - then merge the qt5 branch into master (aka 2.15) - finally

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

On 24 October 2015 at 07:26, Jürgen E. wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 22. Oct 2015 at 08:47:26 +1100, Nyall Dawson wrote: >> Why not: > > - Branch off a qt5 branch from master now and start with porting > - continue as usual with master to produce 2.14 > - branch 2.14 off and release it

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

On 22 October 2015 at 19:52, Nyall Dawson wrote: > On 22 October 2015 at 12:28, Larry Shaffer wrote: >> >> I meant specifically during the porting process. Then, break the API and add >> new features. For example, some plugin devs might need to fix

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

On 22 October 2015 at 12:28, Larry Shaffer wrote: > > I meant specifically during the porting process. Then, break the API and add > new features. For example, some plugin devs might need to fix up their > plugins for all three: Qt5, Py3 and API. If we do all three and

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Il 22/10/2015 03:28, Larry Shaffer ha scritto: > Hi, I think it will also be important to give everyone the possibility of easily installing and maintaining both QGIS 2 and QGIS 3 in parallel, so we'll enjoy more testing and a smoother transition. All the best. -- Paolo Cavallini -

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Hi, On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 2:53 AM, Nyall Dawson wrote: > On 22 October 2015 at 19:52, Nyall Dawson wrote: > > On 22 October 2015 at 12:28, Larry Shaffer > wrote: > >> > >> I meant specifically during the porting

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Hi, On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 10:52 PM, Mathieu Pellerin wrote: > Nyall, > > Great initiative! The sooner a plan can be agreed upon, the better. > > Coincidentally to your QEP proposal, I came up with an alternative > timeline idea over the last few days that would avoid

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

The most important thing would probably be to have a working implementation for * PyQt5 * Python3 If it is possible to merge support for this in the current codebase - just like it's currently possible with Qt5 - we can start to collect experiences. I assume a week or two should be sufficient to

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

On 22 October 2015 at 01:44, Larry Shaffer wrote: > > > I like the idea of 8 months of work for a 3.0 release, with 4 months > concurrent with the 2.14 dev cycle. Although, I think the last thing we need > during the 3.0 porting process is to be bogged down with new bugs

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Hi, On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Nyall Dawson wrote: > On 22 October 2015 at 01:44, Larry Shaffer wrote: > > > > > > > I like the idea of 8 months of work for a 3.0 release, with 4 months > > concurrent with the 2.14 dev cycle. Although, I

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

That's a lot of plugins - over 150, minus a handful of deprecated ones. -- View this message in context: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/QEP-Proposal-for-QGIS-3-0-after-2-14-tp5231556p5231572.html Sent from the Quantum GIS - Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Yes, that's why I'm worried. Many authors will fix them, but I'm not convinced all of them will. I fear many users will stick to older qgis versions because of that. All the best. Il 21 ottobre 2015 08:28:20 CEST, Tom Chadwin ha scritto: >That's a lot of plugins - over

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

I suspect we don't really have any options. It has to happen at some point and it's better to at least have a plan then just drop the bomb and hope it all works out. I think something that might be good is if we can get PyQt5 setup for QGIS we can access how much effort it's going to be and work

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Il 21/10/2015 08:43, Nathan Woodrow ha scritto: > I think something that might be good is if we can get PyQt5 setup for > QGIS we can access how much effort it's going to be and work though one > plugin as team to learn all the traps before scaring anyone with the > details. yes, sounds good,

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

If you need a guinea pig, I am definitely volunteering for this and to start porting Processing ASAP. As you might have realized, Alex and I haven't had too much time lately to work on Processing, so we are very low on people for any Processing-related task. In these circumstances, adapting

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Il 21/10/2015 09:23, Tom Chadwin ha scritto: > How about a qgis-plugins mailing list? I don't get great responses to PyQGIS > questions on Stack Exchange, and this dev list should really be for core > development. I certainly don't feel completely comfortable asking plugin > questions here. A

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

The potential downside is fragmentation of the users across too many lists - specifically, would we lose some subscribers to the dev list? Anyway, I'm in no position to judge that. I know I would find a plugin list useful, if others used it, and it would be useful for the 3.0 migration. -- View

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

How about a qgis-plugins mailing list? I don't get great responses to PyQGIS questions on Stack Exchange, and this dev list should really be for core development. I certainly don't feel completely comfortable asking plugin questions here. A dedicated list would be the place for info and support on

[Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Hi all, Thought I'd try and get things moving on this. Please see https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals/pull/24 for a QEP regarding QGIS 3.0 being the release after 2.14 and the changes proposed for 3.0. Feedback welcome! Nyall ___

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Nyall, Great initiative! The sooner a plan can be agreed upon, the better. Coincidentally to your QEP proposal, I came up with an alternative timeline idea over the last few days that would avoid skipping a release cycle but still give us enough time to complete the port to Qt5. Basically, we

Re: [Qgis-developer] QEP - Proposal for QGIS 3.0 after 2.14

Il 21/10/2015 06:52, Mathieu Pellerin ha scritto: > This alternate timeline proposal both speeds up the delivery of QGIS 3.0 > as well as insuring QGIS 2.14 LTR is shipped with a focus on stability > as devs can push new features onto QGIS 3.0. > > Thoughts? Sounds reasonable. I think we should