[Qgis-developer] A roadmap to QGIS 2.0

Micha Silver micha at arava.co.il
Wed Jan 19 05:10:24 EST 2011

On 18/01/2011 16:04, Andreas Neumann wrote:

> Hi all,
> I like your enthusiasm. However, a release of 2.0 in 
> September at Fossgis, with two additional in between 
> releases, sounds a bit too ambitious to me. Maybe we also 
> shouldn't put too much pressure on us just because the 
> Fossgis conference is happening. There should be a release 
> (maybe 1.8), but it should not be 2.0 in my opinion. Let's 
> save 2.0 until it is really ready and of good quality.
> Also, I would prefer fewer, more stable features and bug 
> fixes, over too many new features that aren't ready for the 
> average user. To me the switch to the new labeling and 
> symbology engine is a priority (but there is still a lot of 
> work to do!), as well as the multi-threading branch and the 
> table joins. The new rasters and on-the-fly raster 
> reprojection would also be nice.

Even tho' I'm not a developer I would chime in with one 
comment, following what you said:

I'd like to see some version be declared "stable".   At this 
point, with the greatly improved maturity of QGIS, I think 
having a recognized stable version is more important than 
additional features. I wish that devs had 5 € for each time, 
on the maillist there was an answer "You prob has been solved 
in the next version, please upgrade". But that's not the 
answer that users want to read.

The QGIS project doesn't use the "release candidate" naming 
convention. And it seems that as soon as each release comes 
out, it is abandoned by developers, who direct their attention 
to new functionality in the next development version. 
Essentially each and every release is an RC, with fixes always 
being done in next up-coming version.

Isn't it time to have a stable QGIS ? Call it LTS, or stable 
or whatever. But users want to know that it will be supported 
for some time, with *no changes* in the GUI, a well known 
feature set, and including "backporting" of bug fixes, etc. 
Perhaps that should be the goal for 2.0?


> Releasing 2.0 and still no table joins seems to be less than 
> ideal to me and will likely be criticized (e.g. in feature 
> comparisons with other GIS). I'd rather invest more time on 
> the really needed stuff that a basic 2D GIS should deliver, 
> than in 3D. 3D, in my opinion, can wait for 2.0 and would 
> then justify the 2.0 release feature wise.
> This is just my opinion as a user/organization who has to 
> rely on QGIS in daily work.
> Thanks to all of you developers for your efforts!
> Andreas
> On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 08:05:56 +0200, Tim Sutton wrote:
>> Hi All
>> I think its time to start thinking about getting 2.0 'out'. 
>> What do
>> others think? The major goal would be to
>> - clean up the api and remove cruft / inelegant parts / 
>> backwards
>> compatibility wrappers
>> - do an overhaul of the api docs and get it to a good state 
>> (doxygen wise)
>> - get rid of old labelling completely
>> - get rid of old symbology completely
>> - merge many of the plugins directly into trunk (north 
>> arrow, gps,
>> coordinate capture, delimited text, georeferencer, some 
>> form of raster
>> colours / 1 band raster colour table etc.)
>> - capitalise on the bug fixing work of SunilRaj from kCube 
>> so that his
>> time is going into stabilising for a 2.0 release
>> - show the world that we have reached the next level of 
>> maturity and
>> functionality
>> -
>> As such I would propose the following time line
>> (http://www.qgis.org/wiki/Release_Checklists)
>> Release Checklist 1.7 - Not yet named     1 April 2011
>>   Introduce threaded rendering, raster on the fly 
>> projection, 3D globe mode
>> Release Checklist 1.8 - Not yet named     1 July 2011
>>   Full GUI freeze for 2.0, no more old symbology, old 
>> labelling
>> Release Checklist 2.0 - Not yet named     1 September 2010
>>   API changes finalised, all deprecation wrappers removed, 
>> API docs
>> tidied up.
>> The timing would allow us to have 2.0 ready to make a 
>> splash at the
>> next FOSS4G conference.
>> Any comments? Does this work for others? Any other major 
>> additions
>> folks think should be in place before QGIS goes out?
>> I look forward to your feedback,
>> Regards
>> Tim
>> -- 
>> Tim Sutton - QGIS Project Steering Committee Member 
>> (Release  Manager)
>> ==============================================
>> Please do not email me off-list with technical
>> support questions. Using the lists will gain
>> more exposure for your issues and the knowledge
>> surrounding your issue will be shared with all.
>> Visit http://linfiniti.com to find out about:
>>  * QGIS programming and support services
>>  * Mapserver and PostGIS based hosting plans
>>  * FOSS Consulting Services
>> Skype: timlinux
>> Irc: timlinux on #qgis at freenode.net
>> ==============================================
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qgis-developer mailing list
>> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Micha Silver
Arava Development Co.  +972-52-3665918

More information about the Qgis-developer mailing list