Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 5:16 PM Jürgen E. Fischer wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 28. Nov 2019 at 10:56:01 +0100, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote: > > Anyway, introducing proj5 and gdal2 packages could work - but not without > > shifting the point release date again. > > As nobody objected (or read that far

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi > On 28 Nov 2019, at 10:05, Matthias Kuhn wrote: >> >> >> As soon as we have a clear view on the strategy, I think we MUST communicate >> widely. We can also ask for support for this, though it will not be an easy >> message. > I agree, this would be perfectly served in a post including

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi, On Thu, 28. Nov 2019 at 10:56:01 +0100, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote: > Anyway, introducing proj5 and gdal2 packages could work - but not without > shifting the point release date again. As nobody objected (or read that far ;)) I have taken the liberty of moving the point releases for another

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi Even Il 28/11/19 15:48, Even Rouault ha scritto: > Jürgen, > >> I've been "playing" with appveyor (doesn't work - hits the 1h timeout), >> azure-pipelines (which kind of works) and github workflows (which does not >> yet work) to implement the Windows CI many people are keen on. Progress is

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi Even, On Thu, 28. Nov 2019 at 15:48:42 +0100, Even Rouault wrote: > > I've been "playing" with appveyor (doesn't work - hits the 1h timeout), > > azure-pipelines (which kind of works) and github workflows (which does not > > yet work) to implement the Windows CI many people are keen on.

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Jürgen, > I've been "playing" with appveyor (doesn't work - hits the 1h timeout), > azure-pipelines (which kind of works) and github workflows (which does not > yet work) to implement the Windows CI many people are keen on. Progress is > very slow - every single step takes ages… A successful

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 10:56:01AM +0100, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote: > I've been "playing" with appveyor (doesn't work - hits the 1h timeout), > azure-pipelines (which kind of works) and github workflows (which does not yet > work) to implement the Windows CI many people are keen on. If you want

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Ouch! ;) yes, 2020. On Thu, Nov 28, 2019, 16:57 Jürgen E. Fischer wrote: > Hi Mathieu, > > On Thu, 28. Nov 2019 at 15:36:39 +0700, Mathieu Pellerin wrote: > > For the record, according to schedule, 3.4 reaches its end of life on > > February 21st, 2010. > > 2020? > > Jürgen > > -- > Jürgen E.

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi Jürgen On 11/28/19 10:59 AM, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote: Hi Matthias, On Thu, 28. Nov 2019 at 10:05:53 +0100, Matthias Kuhn wrote: Originally I wasn't even thinking about an OSGeo4W installer, I was simply hoping for standalone installers. But if OSGeo4W double-packaging is feasible, that

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi Matthias, On Thu, 28. Nov 2019 at 10:05:53 +0100, Matthias Kuhn wrote: > Originally I wasn't even thinking about an OSGeo4W installer, I was simply > hoping for standalone installers. But if OSGeo4W double-packaging is > feasible, that would be the cherry on top. The standalone is always just

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi Mathieu, On Thu, 28. Nov 2019 at 15:36:39 +0700, Mathieu Pellerin wrote: > For the record, according to schedule, 3.4 reaches its end of life on > February 21st, 2010. 2020? Jürgen -- Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-31 Dipl.-Inf. (FH)

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi Andreas, On Thu, 28. Nov 2019 at 09:11:07 +0100, Andreas Neumann wrote: > Thanks all for the discussion. > I would like to hear Jürgen's opinion on it was well. If possible, I would > also prefer Matthias approach. Our organization just recently introduced 3.4 > LTR (I know we are late ;-),

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Thanks for all the comments on this On 11/28/19 9:50 AM, Régis Haubourg wrote: Hi all, Le jeu. 28 nov. 2019 à 09:02, Matthias Kuhn > a écrit : [..] With LTR we have built a brand with a very good reputation and I think we should protect this label and

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

For the record, according to schedule, 3.4 reaches its end of life on February 21st, 2010. On Thu, Nov 28, 2019, 15:11 Andreas Neumann wrote: > Hi all, > > Thanks all for the discussion. > > I would like to hear Jürgen's opinion on it was well. If possible, I would > also prefer Matthias

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi all, I agree, very fruitful discussion. Also agree: it is the release manager who has the last word on this. AFAICT we have two options: * reverting to .12, and stop releasing new versions * replacing .13 to gdal2+proj4, and keep on releasing with the standard schedule. I believe the main

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi all, Thanks all for the discussion. I would like to hear Jürgen's opinion on it was well. If possible, I would also prefer Matthias approach. Our organization just recently introduced 3.4 LTR (I know we are late ;-), we will probably move to 3.10 in mid 2020). It would be nice if the

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi all, I enjoy reading the discussion on this tricky topic. Thank you for looking into this! What would be the precise plan of action? The situation is, a new QGIS 3.4.13 release based on gdal3/proj6 is out already. We cannot make that undone unless we get out the message to forget that

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Just have to make sure we communicate this via the blog and why. On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 10:38 AM Mathieu Pellerin wrote: > +1 to end 3.4 cycle a few months early too. > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2019, 05:57 Nathan Woodrow wrote: > >> +1 on dropping support early as the risk is large on breaking the

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

+1 to end 3.4 cycle a few months early too. On Thu, Nov 28, 2019, 05:57 Nathan Woodrow wrote: > +1 on dropping support early as the risk is large on breaking the users > experience with a LTR > > On Thu., 28 Nov. 2019, 8:55 am Even Rouault, > wrote: > >> > I think the issues are deeper then

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

+1 on dropping support early as the risk is large on breaking the users experience with a LTR On Thu., 28 Nov. 2019, 8:55 am Even Rouault, wrote: > > I think the issues are deeper then the crashes/projection failures > > fixed by the GDAL/proj cherry-picked commits. > > Yes, actually QGIS 3.4

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

> I think the issues are deeper then the crashes/projection failures > fixed by the GDAL/proj cherry-picked commits. Yes, actually QGIS 3.4 should not be affected by the PROJ fix, because it uses the old pj_transform() API with doesn't trigger that code path at all. But it *is* affected by

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 18:37, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote: > > Hi Andrea, > > On Wed, 27. Nov 2019 at 00:59:08 -0700, andreaerdna wrote: > > What about the OSGeo4W installer? Now, installing qgis-ltr from OSGeo4W > > installer will also install gdal-3.0.2-3 and proj-6.2.1-2. > > And those don't fix

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi Andrea, On Wed, 27. Nov 2019 at 00:59:08 -0700, andreaerdna wrote: > What about the OSGeo4W installer? Now, installing qgis-ltr from OSGeo4W > installer will also install gdal-3.0.2-3 and proj-6.2.1-2. And those don't fix the issue for you? Jürgen -- Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Nyall Dawson wrote > So we could revert to 3.4.13-1 It seems the standalone installer 3.4.13-2 for MS Windows is still available for download on qgis.org. Would it be possible to undo the commit https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Website/commit/6a9c3a01b98a291be21994dd61d8c0299b9a7ead ? Undoing the

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

> An alternative would be to keep on > releasing new versions, issuing a big warning about the risks and > complications involved, so as to leave the responsibility in the hands > of users. I may be skeptical and underestimate our users, but I honestly wouldn't feel comfortable placing this

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi Andrea, On Sun, 24. Nov 2019 at 09:24:36 -0700, andreaerdna wrote: > Even Rouault-2 wrote > > That would rather be 3.4.12 to have the last built based on GDAL 2.4 + > > PROJ 5, > > no ? At least for the standalone installer > If I'm not wrong, there are: > - QGIS-OSGeo4W-3.4.12-1 > -

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Even Rouault-2 wrote > That would rather be 3.4.12 to have the last built based on GDAL 2.4 + > PROJ 5, > no ? At least for the standalone installer If I'm not wrong, there are: - QGIS-OSGeo4W-3.4.12-1 - QGIS-OSGeo4W-3.4.13-1 both with GDAL 2.4.1 + PROJ 5.2.0 (+ proj4dll 4.9.3) and -

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

> I'd also like to extend Tim's thanks here and publicly state my > appreciation to Jürgen for an extremely difficult, thankless job which > you've done SO well, SO consistently and for SO long. I "third" this appreciation ! > Regarding 3.4: One option we should explore is just freezing the >

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi Nyall, all Il 2019-11-24 05:13 Nyall Dawson ha scritto: Regarding 3.4: One option we should explore is just freezing the Windows releases at 3.4.13, and leaving 3.4.13 as the final supported 3.4 release for Windows. (For reference, 3.4.16 is the planned final 3.4.x release, so we'd "lose" 3

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi Also Jürgen and Nyall: is there anything the PSC could be funding to help you allocate the time needed to help get things to a good conclusion? PSC this is IMHO be a better use of overflow funds right now than e.g. windows CI infrastructure. Regards Tim > On 24 Nov 2019, at 04:13, Nyall

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 at 02:38, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote: > > So overall how the situation was handled doesn't seem that bad for a release > > exercising new major dependencies. Agreed. I'd also like to extend Tim's thanks here and publicly state my appreciation to Jürgen for an extremely

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi > On 23 Nov 2019, at 16:38, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote: > Snip 8<-- > More background: > > * GDAL 3 requires PROJ 6 > * QGIS 3.10 has optional features that require GDAL 3, > * GRASS uses OSGeo4W for dependencies on Windows, > * GRASS also contributes the GRASS packages to OSGeo4W,

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

On samedi 23 novembre 2019 17:44:15 CET Jürgen E. Fischer wrote: > Hi Even, > > On Sat, 23. Nov 2019 at 17:36:52 +0100, Even Rouault wrote: > > But for the future, I can imagine we could have: > > qgis3_10 depending on gdal3 (or possibly even gdal3_0 ?) and proj6 and > >

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi Even, On Sat, 23. Nov 2019 at 17:36:52 +0100, Even Rouault wrote: > But for the future, I can imagine we could have: > qgis3_10 depending on gdal3 (or possibly even gdal3_0 ?) and proj6 and > qt_whatever_we_use_currently > And qgis3_12 could decide to upgrade one of its dependencies without

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi Even, On Fri, 22. Nov 2019 at 23:20:49 +0100, Even Rouault wrote: > > QGIS LTR in Windows has also switched from proj 5.x and gdal 2.x to > > proj 6.x and gdal 3.x which has resulted in some new bugs. > I see 2 different situations: > - 3.10 was intended to work with GDAL 3 & PROJ 6 (work

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

On samedi 23 novembre 2019 12:23:12 CET Paolo Cavallini wrote: > Hi Tim, > > Il 23/11/19 11:22, Tim Sutton ha scritto: > > For windows at least we could ‘freeze’ 3.4.x by pointing them to use the > > standalone installers but then we have an LTR that is not getting bug > > fixes. As I read

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Add to what was said (which I don't disagree with per say). I think it's important to note that this GDAL3/PROJ6 transition was always going to be rocky (whether we applied it to 3.4 LTR or delayed it of 4 months when 3.10 LTR will replace 3.4. One reason being most core developers are on linux

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

HI, I totally agree with Nathan on this topic. Regards, Michaël Le sam. 23 nov. 2019 à 13:37, Nathan Woodrow a écrit : > Hey, > > I know it has been said before, but changing the GDAL/Proj version of the > LTR versions is really a no go. It's a breaking change in terms of possible > breakages

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hey, I know it has been said before, but changing the GDAL/Proj version of the LTR versions is really a no go. It's a breaking change in terms of possible breakages and just increases risks on a version we need to stay stable. We are communicating to users they should use the LTR because it's

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi We also have situations like this [1] where we are breaking the LTR with. Big bumps in GDAL/PROJ version. Could we either a) invest QGIS bug fixing money into resolving these or b) adopt a more conservative approach to adopting new versions of libraries?

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi Tim, Il 23/11/19 11:22, Tim Sutton ha scritto: > For windows at least we could ‘freeze’ 3.4.x by pointing them to use the > standalone installers but then we have an LTR that is not getting bug > fixes. As I read Jürgen’s roadmap [1] we still have 4 more bug fix > releases of 3.4 before 3.10

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Thanks Even! I was mislead by the hard freeze and had an impression 3.10 is going to be more stable than it actually was meant to be. I'm often not sure what level of predictability we can expect from the official builds and your response shreds more light on it. And, first of all, big thanks

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

On 11/23/19 9:05 AM, Paolo Cavallini wrote: > IMHO the LTR should be as stable as possible, so I agree that changing > things now it's unfortunate. Changing dependencies are pretty much inevitable, LTR needs to adapt to those or become unusable which defeats the purpose of LTR. PROJ 6 & GDAL 3

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi Paolo > On 23 Nov 2019, at 08:05, Paolo Cavallini wrote: > > Hi all, > > Il 22/11/19 23:20, Even Rouault ha scritto: > >> Or one might consider a mixed approach to have a good compromise of agility >> vs >> tighter control: >> - use time-based approach, as done currently, for non-LTR

Re: [QGIS-Developer] LTR management [was Re: Delaying 3.10.1?]

Hi all, Il 22/11/19 23:20, Even Rouault ha scritto: > Or one might consider a mixed approach to have a good compromise of agility > vs > tighter control: > - use time-based approach, as done currently, for non-LTR versions. > - formally approve the release of LTR versions, and important