[Qgis-developer] 3.0 Documentation and branching

[DelazJ]

Hi,

Alexandre, Thanks for the clarification. Indeed we need to hear people once
for all on this (these) topic(s) and ensure any contribution is not
rejected or discouraged. And I think making PR guarantee that a
contribution is taken into account (we still have a queue shorter than QGIS
repo's :) )

Richard, I think it's more than clear that the next application release is
3.0 and the 2.x serie is behind us now. It's also clear that after 2.14,
the next LTR will be 3.2. Btw, we need to update a bit
http://qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/development/roadmap.html#release-schedule
The 2.x vs 3.0 issue reports separation in Doc repo was at that time due to
the hypothetic release of a QGIS 2.20 which would be a LTR hence would
deserve a documentation (due to the rule "only LTRs are documented"). Now
there will be no 2.20 and the next LTR is two releases away so, as Richard
said "the main question is: do we decide to NOT release a newer
documentation(!) 2.x branch anymore this year.?" In other words: Do we keep
2.x series documentation at 2.14 level, while there are 2.16 and 2.18
releases that would surely be used for a while?

That's all! And I'm fine with whatever (argumented) answer is made! if the
answer is a categoric No :), let's pull 3.0 fixes
If the answer is "Yes, we want to release a 2.18 documentation" (without
translation of course), we can still begin working on 3.0 issues by
creating a master_2 branch for 2.18 fixes and port fixes from a branch to
another. It has been made with QGIS repo. I'm sure it 'd not be that hard
to maintain. It's not like if we have codes, it's all about text (more
understandable and cherry-pickable for me, anyway).

Btw, given that we are in dev list, allow me to remind that in the thread
in psc-list, there was a call for devs to help maintain and reinforce the
backend of documentation.... you are welcome... Thanks

Regards,
Harrissou

2017-02-09 8:36 GMT+01:00 Richard Duivenvoorde <rdmailings at duif.net>:

> On 08-02-17 12:42, Alexandre Neto wrote:
> > My concerns are about this part:
> >
> > /"Then, afaict, a part of this commit is more about QGIS 3 changes and I
> > am not sure we are currently documenting QGIS3 stuffs (still waiting for
> > comments and decision in this thread
> > <https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/2017-January/005060.html>)."
> >
> > /
> > So, with my email, I just wanted to go back to the discussion of what
> > versions we are planning/want to release and have a decision. Also, make
> > sure that whatever the decision on that, we have a solution that does
> > not put a developer's (or anyone else) PR on hold (not merged) if they
> > want to contribute documentation for the current is master version.
> > Mainly because people's availability and motivation can be affected by
> that.
>
> Hi Alexandre,
>
> the main reason holding back 3.0 descriptions from master is to be able
> to release a (nowadays pretty theoretical?) new LTR in 2.x branch.
>
> This in case that waiting for a stable 3.x (plus a reasonable set of
> working python plugins!) would take too long, and the community would
> decide or ask for another 2.x release to be able to do their daily work
> with QGIS.
>
> IF we are more or less sure that there will NO MORE 2.x QGIS (LTR's?)
> anymore, we can decide to lift this clear 2.x - 3.x separation (thanks
> Harrissou for defending this :-) ).
>
> So the main question is: do we decide to NOT release a newer
> documentation(!) 2.x branch anymore this year.
>
> Regards,
>
> Richard
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20170209/e0c2a551/attachment.html>