[Qgis-developer] Ugly jumping maps while zooming
giohappy at gmail.com
Mon Dec 22 14:57:04 PST 2014
I agree with Nyall. I think putting hidden "proof of concepts" within an
official release doesn't put QGIS in a good light. It could be ok some time
ago, when QGIS was a niche, but not today. If a sponsorship campagin is
required to complete the development we should pursue different marketing
strategies (e.g. blogs, videos showing the upcoming features).
2014-12-22 23:47 GMT+01:00 Nyall Dawson <nyall.dawson at gmail.com>:
> Sorry, gmail messed up my original reply:
> On 23 Dec 2014 5:11 am, "Paolo Cavallini" <cavallini at faunalia.it> wrote:
> > IMHO removing the function will make much more difficult to attract
> > interest and funding to complete the necessary features. My proposal:
> > add an option to add the rotation spinbox, deactivated by default, and
> > clearly marked as experimental/incomplete. In this way, only
> > interested and conscious people will activate it, if they are ready to
> > bear the missing parts.
> I disagree - while there may be an issue with the difficulty of getting
> wide testing of pull requests, the solution isn't to allow broken code into
> We've recently made great progress in showing that we are a serious
> enterprise ready alternative, with the introduction of CI testing and the
> proposals for LTS releases. We now need to show that we are serious about
> the quality of our code and product by not allowing broken or beta features
> into releases. Adding a checkbox to unlock such features isn't a good
> solution - it just looks amateurish and hacky!
> As it stands right now, what is the use of this feature? It can't be used
> for presentation (no composer support) nor for analysis or querying use
> (broken selection and info tools). Without addressing these issues this
> feature has no current use case (I may be missing something here, feel free
> to fill me in if I am). Sandro has made it clear that he currently has no
> plans for tackling these issues before our next release - meaning either:
> 1. Our first LTS release will be left with a broken, buggy feature, which
> is not a good impression at all for users and sponsors.
> 2. Someone else will have to volunteer their time to fix this code before
> This is a big decision, as it has the potential to set the precedence for
> how QGIS is developed. Do we allow work-in-progress and incomplete features
> in master, or should they be left in branches and pull requests until they
> are complete and largely bug free?
> Personally, I'm strongly in favour of the second option.
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
GEO+ geomatica in Italia http://bit.ly/GEOplus
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Qgis-developer