[Qgis-developer] Stability (2.8 LTS) vs development (3.0), a proposed way forward

[Nathan Woodrow]

> So, I believe that in production environment the most stable (!=
latest) version is used. For almost 2 years we used 1.7.4, for me the
most stable QGIS version in earth (more than 2.4 and 2.6!).

Oh man. I couldn't even use 1.7.4 anymore it's so old ;)

Anyway the point is a valid one.  Running the latest != most stable.

IMO we don't need "resources" to do bug fixing.  The dev that does the bug
fix in master can do it in the 2.x branch for that stable release if it is
relevant.. This obviously has to be done smart but using the recent crash
and project corruption as an example that Martin fixed right away, to me
this warrants a new release off that branch, LTS or not, as project
corruption is a really really bad look.

- Nathan

On Mon Nov 10 2014 at 7:43:27 PM Luca Manganelli <luca76 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Paolo Cavallini <cavallini at faunalia.it>
> wrote:
> > To me, the whole issue boils down to having resources to do
> > serious backporting of fixes. Without that, LTS will have no practical
> > effect, as users will use the latest, more bugfixed version.
>
> "more bugfixed" is not always true. We had issues with 1.8.0 and 2.2.0
> and we refused to use them in our organization due to critical bugs
> that are fixed in newer version, but they have sometimes introduced
> other.
>
> So, I believe that in production environment the most stable (!=
> latest) version is used. For almost 2 years we used 1.7.4, for me the
> most stable QGIS version in earth (more than 2.4 and 2.6!).
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20141110/9290247b/attachment.html>