<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Hi all - <br>
</p>
<p>I have a few comments regarding the possible removal of the
"QGIS LTR versions" ( as one of the original proponents for having
a LTR version ) :<br>
</p>
<ul>
<li>The LTR version is the version that almost <i>all</i>
QGIS-using <i>organisations</i> in Denmark is using. That means
40 - 50 % of all municipalities, regions (counties) and a number
of state departments. And a lot of private companies too. They
use it mostly in conjunction with some kind of "Web GIS" and
have QGIS for the hard and complex stuff. This market
penetration is on par with ESRI and better than MapInfo. As a
treasurer of the QGIS Denmark User group I've registered 85
Danish organisational members out of 260 members. And this
number is growing. So there is a large and growing number of
QGIS users, that prefer the LTR version (actually the vast
majority if you count the individual users in the organisations)
. <br>
The yearly fee from these organisational members is in large
part the reason why QGIS Denmark has a Gold sponsorship of
QGIS. <br>
<br>
I don't know about other countries, but I <i>guess, </i>that
preferences in organisations is roughly the same: They prefer
stability and as few errors as possible. And thirdly new glitzy
features<br>
<br>
</li>
<li>I we ditch the LTR versions, I fear that an old nemesis will
resurface: That there is not <i>any </i>version of QGIS that
is really stable: A small irritating bug in ver. x will be
solved in ver. x+1. However ver. x+1 contains another small
irritating bug, that will be solved in version x+2 .... <br>
<br>
I know that the development process for QGIS has evolved
tremendously the last couple of years. However, I still remember
the "bad old days" with "no responsibility" for killing bugs in
existing code caused by introduction of new code.<br>
<br>
</li>
<li>In my experience, the 1 - year period for LTR is the shortest
period acceptable for organisations. They don't want to
repackage QGIS every 6 months and certainly not every 4 months.
You might even let the period be 1.5- 2 years instead of 1 year.
<br>
<br>
</li>
<li>The quagmire of ver. 3.16... Isn't it a combination of a
relatively old version of QGIS fine tuned to a set of support
libraries, where the support libraries gets upgraded "an masse"
because OsGeo4W gets upgraded from v1 to v2.; SIP gets upgraded
from v4 to v6. And the proj library goes through several
upgrades from v4 to v8 ? I my perspective that's a receipt for
"The perfect storm". If it can't be fixed, then freeze it at
3.16.11 and fast-promote ver. 3.22 as LTR, perhaps with a big
warning sign on it.<br>
This it not a critique of the upgrade process. Every piece of
software, including supporting libraries has to be upgraded from
time to time. However I count 3 major upgrades of libraries on
the same time <br>
NB! Just read Jürgen's posting on ver. 3.16.14 being released
on friday. If it works, then that's solves the ver. 3.16 issues
for me. <br>
<br>
</li>
<li>I know, bug squashing is nobody's favourite programming
discipline. Especially if you not are paid for doing it. Hence
the need for bug squashin by payment. So what about trying to
reach out to the large (or small) sponsors and ask them if they
could put some extra coins in the pot earmarked for LTR ? I
can't solely speak for QGIS Denmark User group, but I would
certainly discuss this problem with other members of the board
and eventually the general assembly. And we have some contacts
with the other QGIS usergroups i Scandinavia. The Swiss
usergroup could for example talk with the german usergroup (I
know the problem is not based on language, but sometimes it's
easier to promote an idea with people talking roughly the same
language) <br>
<br>
So how much money are we talking about ? <br>
<br>
</li>
</ul>
Whatever that's decided regarding the LTR, I personally still will
be a staunch supporter of QGIS. But please don't throw the baby out
with the bathwater without due consideration and without trying
alternative solutions.<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Med venlig hilsen / Kind regards
Bo Victor Thomsen</pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Den 16-11-2021 kl. 09:22 skrev
Alessandro Pasotti:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAL5Q670FX1ZqThpaJF2XZ-jN+AtCoGxqH9emoL1+9S8J-Cgr8Q@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 8:50
AM Marco Bernasocchi <<a href="mailto:marco@qgis.org"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">marco@qgis.org</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">Hi Anita, Hi Nyall, Hi All
<div>I think that it is a good idea to allocate the first
half hour (and more if needed) in tonight's budget
meeting to this very pressing subject.<br>
Nyall, thanks a lot for your analysis, we'll use it as
discussion base.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I extended the meeting invitation from 18:00 to
19:30. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>See you later</div>
<div>Marco<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<br clear="all">
</blockquote>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Hi,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>thinking about how to possibly prevent this to happen again
I think that the manual testing cycles as proposed with <a
href="https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/2020-December/009186.html"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/2020-December/009186.html</a>
could help in identifying biggest issues before a release.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I think we should consider the possibility of investing in
that direction.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Kind regards.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
-- <br>
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Alessandro Pasotti</div>
<div>QCooperative: <a href="https://www.qcooperative.net"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.qcooperative.net</a><br>
</div>
ItOpen: <a href="http://www.itopen.it" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">www.itopen.it</a></div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
QGIS-Developer mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org">QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org</a>
List info: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a>
Unsubscribe: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>