[Qgis-developer] Managing a future 2.18 or 3.0 documentation?

[DelazJ]

Hi,
Thanks for your comments

Richard, I'll be doing it by hand for the moment, meaning that I'll create
a 2.18 milestone and put issues from master_2 inside (often duplicated in
3.0, such as https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Documentation/issues/1208 vs
https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Documentation/issues/1207; i'll then remove
the copy from 3.0 milestone)

Do you agree with this process?
Even if we do not know now if a 2.18 doc will be released, at least we'd
have kept needed elements to write it if decision is made (will require
more writers involved).


Harrissou

2016-07-20 23:17 GMT+02:00 Richard Duivenvoorde <rdmailings at duif.net>:

> On 20-07-16 09:29, Yves Jacolin wrote:
> > Matthias, Harrissou,
> >
> > On Wednesday, July 20, 2016 9:12:17 Matthias Kuhn wrote:
> >> Hi Harrissou
> >>
> >> On 07/20/2016 08:47 AM, DelazJ wrote:
> >> [..]
> >>
> >>> So questions:
> >>> - Will we have a 2.18 (if ever) documentation?
> >>
> >> I think it would be good to plan 2.18 in general. Triggering the release
> >> scripts should be trivial. Since some features end up in 2.18, I guess
> >> it will happen.
> >> Concerning docs and also pre-release fixing, I wonder if this effort
> >> should be spent on the 3.0 migration instead?
> >
> > So, either we can know which feature is in 2.18 and which in 3.0 and we
> can
> > target the ticket (in the doc repository) in the two milestone and
> without
> > much work, or we can't.
> >
> > Anyway, as we are "still" working in the 2.16 release,  I guess we can
> aims to
> > release it at the end of the year, not before.
> >
> > Next, we should focus on 3.0 to get the doc ready for QGIS 3.0, at the
> > beginning of 2017.
> >
> > So +1 for your proposition.
> >
> >> [..]
> >>> - Should the webhook set different milestions according to the branch
> >>> used?
> >>
> >> Yes, master_2 => 2.18, master => 3.0.
> > Are you sure? 2.18 milestone doesn't exist in the QGIS doc repository.
> >
> >>
> >> Has there ever been a documentation released for 2.10 and 2.12?
> >> If non-LTR get no documentation, there's probably not much point in
> >> doing one for 2.18 I think?
> >> People can still refer to the "testing" doc from master instead which
> >> should match in many points (and where not, some notes can be included).
> > Indeed, but this is more a consequence than a cause. In the mid term I
> prefer
> > that we add new feature in the doc in the same time that the ticket is
> created
> > and so get a documentation release for each QGIS release.
>
> We tried in history, but the doc (and doc release-) team could just not
> cope with all the releases. So we more or less decided to only build (at
> least translated) the docs for LTR versions.
>
> 2.16 is non-ltr and 2.18 is a special case.. so I would also be OK to
> concentrate on a docs build  for 3.0. So only pick features which will
> be ported to 3.0 from 2.16 and 2.18 etcetc
>
> But we can off course try to follow... currently '[FEATURE]' is
> automatically labeled as 3.0 milestone...
> IF we want to distinguish between those, we either have to fix the script:
>
> https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Sysadmin/blob/master/webhooks/github_feature_tracker.cgi
> Or do it by hand...
>
> Regards,
>
> Richard
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160727/bf00105c/attachment-0001.html>