[Qgis-developer] 1.1 and 1.0.1 Release plans & feature freeze

[Otto Dassau]

Hi,

On Sat, 9 May 2009 16:51:54 +0200
Martin Dobias <wonder.sk at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Carson Farmer <carson.farmer at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Otto et al.,
> >
> > I very much like this idea. Some of my own thoughts:
> >
> > Another possible set of tags: [NEW FEATURE], [BUG FIX], or [UPDATE].
> >
> > That way the developer doesn't have to decide on their own if the change
> > need to be added to the manual. Manual writers can simply decide if the NEW
> > FEATURE needs to be added or not... I also think that NEW FEATURE is more
> > intuitive for developers than MANUAL which is likely not something they are
> > thinking about at the time...
> 
> [Manual] seems to me too broad term. On the other hand, is there any
> need for [bug fix] tag? 

no there is no need for a [bug fix] tag, I think.

> Usually it's clear from the commit message :-)
> I would vote for [FEATURE] and [UPDATE]. But still I'm not sure what
> should be considered as an update... (any thoughts of examples what is
> and what is not an update?)

Probably with [UPDATE] Carson means anything that is not a new feature but
should be mentioned. Maybe something like icon changes or ?.

> Anyway, it will probably need some time to get used to any tagging...
> developers are lazy, otherwise they wouldn't have became developers
> :-)

We should be keep it simple. We don't want developers to spend any (much) time
to think about what tag to use. If you are ok with [FEATURE] and [UPDATE] it
would be fine for us and very helpful! All we need is a simple hint we can grep
from the svn commit logs so we don't miss anything.

regards,
 Otto

> Martin