[Qgis-developer] 3.0 Documentation and branching

[Alexandre Neto]

According to the latest news, it seems that there will make sense to have a
2.18 Documentation release...

Sorry for trying to "rush" it to 3.0. Or will it be 3.2?

Anyway, I am going to put some effort in fixing 2.x issues in the user's
manual.

A qui, 9/02/2017, 09:39, DelazJ <delazj at gmail.com> escreveu:

> 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
>
>
> --
Alexandre Neto
---------------------
@AlexNetoGeo
http://sigsemgrilhetas.wordpress.com
http://gisunchained.wordpress.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20170221/5ceaacdb/attachment.html>