[Qgis-developer] Ugly jumping maps while zooming

Nathan Woodrow madmanwoo at gmail.com
Mon Dec 22 15:31:31 PST 2014

On Tue Dec 23 2014 at 8:57:26 AM G. Allegri <giohappy at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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).
> giovanni
> 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
>> master.
>> 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.
>> Or,
>> 2. Someone else will have to volunteer their time to fix this code before
>> release.
>> 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.
>> Nyall
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qgis-developer mailing list
>> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> --
> Giovanni Allegri
> http://about.me/giovanniallegri
> Twitter: https://twitter.com/_giohappy_
> blog: http://blog.spaziogis.it
> GEO+ geomatica in Italia http://bit.ly/GEOplus
>  _______________________________________________
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20141222/bc6e1743/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Qgis-developer mailing list