[Qgis-developer] Failing tests consider blockers

Marco Hugentobler marco.hugentobler at sourcepole.ch
Wed Feb 19 02:44:14 PST 2014


I'm voting for releasing in time as is.
We had that discussion prior to each release before. It turned out that 
after shifting the release date, new must-fix bugs showed up and the 
release was shifted over and over again.
With a fixed release schedule, it is no problem to wait for the next 
release with bugfixes and features, because the next release comes 
within a few months. If releases are delayed, people cannot rely on a 
next release coming after four months.


On 19.02.2014 11:33, Radim Blazek wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Jürgen E. <jef at norbit.de> wrote:
>> Hi Radim,
>> On Wed, 19. Feb 2014 at 09:14:43 +0100, Radim Blazek wrote:
>>> On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 11:41 PM, Jürgen E. <jef at norbit.de> wrote:
>>>> What I wanted to say is that there are a bunch of tests that fail because
>>>> they are not up to date or fail for other reasons that are not related to
>>>> actual bugs in qgis itself. For example render tests, which fail because of
>>>> fonts or other differences (eg. removed renderers).  I think that are the
>>>> majority of tests that currently fail.
>>> Platform dependent tests (fonts) don't make sense for me and should be
>>> disabled until get fixed (e.g. using font set shipped with QGIS).  Renderer
>>> test should be updated and only real bugs will remain and those should be
>>> blockers, I think.
>> Well, there are platform dependant bugs and therefore there also could be
>> platform dependant tests.  But those would need to be clearly marked as such
>> and only run on the corresponding platform.
>> Do we need to discuss that failing tests - or any other bug - should be fixed?
>> I doubt that we do.
>> I'm just objecting to planing ahead too much
> Exactly, so why to insist exactly on release day planned 3 months ago?
>> - let's first fix the tests and then decide further steps.
> That won't work, we must be forced to fix them.
>>>> Another thing is that we don't have the concept of actual blockers anymore.
>>>> We release every four months what we have at that point.  Blockers are just
>>>> highest priority for bugs.
>>> Blockers do not block stable release?! I don't think anything like that was
>>> ever explicitly said nor there is a general consensus about that. I read your
>>> release plan again and I only found:
>> We just have releases.  The plan is to release what we have on release day.  Of
>> course that should be in the best possible shape, but whatever we do it will
>> have known und unknown bugs.
> Whatever we do it will have unknown bugs but does not have to have known bugs.
> I am strongly against releasing with known blockers.
> Radim
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Dr. Marco Hugentobler
Sourcepole -  Linux & Open Source Solutions
Weberstrasse 5, CH-8004 Zürich, Switzerland
marco.hugentobler at sourcepole.ch http://www.sourcepole.ch
Technical Advisor QGIS Project Steering Committee

More information about the Qgis-developer mailing list