[Qgis-developer] Idea: mandatory PR for all 3.0 api breaks?

[Nyall Dawson]

On 10 Jul 2016 3:52 PM, "Matthias Kuhn" <matthias at opengis.ch> wrote:
>
> Thanks for raising this Nyall
>
> On 10/07/16 00:18, Nyall Dawson wrote:
> > I'd like to raise an idea for discussion: should we *require* that all
> > 3.0 API breaks are introduced via a PR?
> I am in favor of this.
>
> > Advantages I'd see are:
> > 1. wider discussion about the nicest way the new/modified API could work
> > 2. allows for discussion about whether the documentation for the API
> > break is sufficient for plugin developers
> >
> > Disadvantages:
> > 1. More work
> > 2. Given that there's going to be a lot of breaks, it could slow
> > development down.
>
> I am in favor of this.
>
> Sometimes it's nice to change some things and get other opinions.
> Leaving it open for a few days should be enough to give it visibility.
>
> Speaking of which... How are we documenting API changes?
> Doxygen, website or documentation?

I thought we decided on doxygen?

https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/3290

Shows how'd I'd go about it

Nyall
>
> Matthias
>
> >
> > I'm a +0 on this.
> >
> > Nyall
> > _______________________________________________
> > Qgis-developer mailing list
> > Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
> > List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> > Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
> List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20160710/256c0e48/attachment.html>