[Qgis-developer] Merging of incompatible changes

[Ramon Andiñach]

On 27/10/2012, at 07:41 , Tim Sutton wrote:

> Hi All
> 
> 
> Firstly my apologies for taking so long to join in to this thread (and
> for top posting) - I haven't been able to come up for air since
> leaving Essen. In terms of the release roadmap for 2.0 the following
> items were discussed in the hackfest in Essen as being the key
> features we would hold the release for:
> 
> 1) Raster overhaul
> 2) WMTS Support
> 3) Atlas integration for composer
> 4) WCS Client support
> 5) Transactional WFS support for QGIS Server
> 6) SIP Bindings revision
> 7) Symbology overhaul (needs support for random colour assignment and
> property change on multiselections)
> 8) Sextante
> 9) Threading (non blocker wait fro 3.0)
> 10) Labelling overhaul
> 11) Diagrams overhaul (and remove of old implementation)
> 12) Oracle support (non blocker for 2.0)
> 13) Web site and docs update
> 14) Universal usage of expression builder
> 
> We agreed that when these features are present we will roll out the
> release, with the hope that that could take place early next year.
> Come end of December I think we should take a look at the items listed
> and if any are obviously not making headway we should remove them from
> the blocker list or find out if there is a way to bring them to the
> foreground. The list above was also not intended to be exclusive, so
> if other developments are offered for incorporation they will be
> considered and accepted / declined on their merits.
> 

I'd like to put an oar in from a user-end of things. If I may.

I'd love to see threading in 2.0. It seems to be something that crops up fairly frequently (e.g. "why does QGIS use only half the available CPU?" and similar). Admittedly this isn't asked as frequently as the "why isn't there a random in the New Symbology?" question but it is a question that is repeated. It certainly seems to be something that people are wanting, and if a window of opportunity exists at the moment, then perhaps it should be taken.

Secondly, when Martin's bits do get merged in would it be possible for all of us users to be reminded that 1.9/master is not stable and things will break? Mailing list and a few blogs?
I say this because I'm fairly sure there's a lot of us that use 1.9 as if it were stable (or at least as stable as the development versions that turned into 1.7 and 1.8 were) and more than normally this is about not to be the case.

The list above is really interesting and it's going to be a lot of fun working out these new bits and pieces.

-ramon.