[Qgis-psc] outstanding issues

[Tim Sutton]

Hi

> On 20 Nov 2015, at 10:26, Richard Duivenvoorde <richard at duif.net> wrote:
> 
> On 13-11-15 19:44, Tim Sutton wrote:
>> Hi 
>> 
>>> On 13 Nov 2015, at 20:40, Giovanni Manghi <giovanni.manghi at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:giovanni.manghi at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dear PSC, good afternoon,
>>> 
>>> as I said this are not recent issues, and in my point of view very
>>> very bad.
>>> 
>> 
>> Andreas could we allocate some funds for taking care of this and
>> releasing 2.8.4? It seems like a very good way to spend donated project
>> money.
> 
> Hi Tim,
> 
> I miss your email in which you stated the 3 FTools options, and copy
> your options below from the lists.osgeo.org lists:
> 
> (From Tim's email:)>>>
> So I see three options:
> 
> 1) make small band-aid fixes to fix immediate issues
> 2) try to sponsor e.g. Nyall or Jürgen to completely rewrite in C++ and
> have python bindings added so that they can be used from processing
> 3) try to sponsor e.g. Victor to implement as processing algs and then
> just wrap them as actions in the vector menu
> <<< (End copy Tim's email)
> 
> One point I like to make is that I think point 2 looks like a waste of
> time and energy to me, IF(!) it is really true that SP already did this
> but keeping it for their own version until they have time to merge.
> Off course everybody has the right to sell and make money from QGIS, but
> having a seat in PSC and keeping stuff away from your own community does
> not sound OK to me.
> But I hope I'm just plain wrong and do not understand the problem :-)

SP have indicated that they do not have time to back port it now to QGIS upstream and when I asked if they will back port if we can fund it they indicated they consider it as a ‘value add’ to their customers (Marco / Pirmin please correct my statements if I misinterpreted your message) which they are not yet ready to pass on upstream. Obviously that is not ideal but we cannot force them to contribute their changes back hence my suggestion for 2). Reimplementing it may not be the most ideal outcome financially or in terms of time wastage, but just in terms of the technical platform, having both C++ and python bindings to them seems like the nicest state we can have the code in.

Regards

Tim

> 
> Regards,
> 
> Richard Duivenvoorde
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc




Tim Sutton
QGIS Project Steering Committee Member
tim at qgis.org




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20151120/f28e7d73/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PastedGraphic-1.tiff
Type: image/tiff
Size: 9882 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20151120/f28e7d73/attachment.tiff>