[Qgis-developer] 3.0 Documentation and branching
Matthias Kuhn
matthias at opengis.ch
Fri Mar 3 09:21:04 PST 2017
Hi Alexandre
On 03/03/2017 05:46 PM, Alexandre Neto wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Sorry to come back to this thread. But, although it seems that we will
> have a 2.18 documentation release, we are still blocking the
> documentation of new features arriving to the QGIS 3.0 Branch. And there
> are tons of it.
>
> So, could we adopt some strategy about this? Maybe two master branches
There is only one master branch at the moment (master_2 was sent to the
happy hunting grounds a couple of months ago).
So if the decision is to work on two branches in parallel, better work
on release-2_18 and master.
If you have an eye on the qgis/release-2_18 branch and compare it to the
commits on documentation/master, I think backporting might indeed be
worth a try.
But remember, that I've got no idea about your workflows ;)
Matthias
> if necessary (as done for QGIS code). Or branch 2.18 documentation, work
> normally in master and backport all functionalities that were missing?
>
> Any opinions or ideas?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Alexandre Neto <senhor.neto at gmail.com <mailto:senhor.neto at gmail.com>>
> escreveu no dia quarta, 22/02/2017 às 12:50:
>
> I can try. Although I don't have your eye for details. :-)
>
>
> A qua, 22/02/2017, 12:01, DelazJ <delazj at gmail.com
> <mailto:delazj at gmail.com>> escreveu:
>
> Hi,
>
> 2017-02-22 0:38 GMT+01:00 Alexandre Neto <senhor.neto at gmail.com
> <mailto:senhor.neto at gmail.com>>:
>
> 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.
>
>
> Like reviewing some of the pending pull requests? :)
> Thanks
>
> H.
>
> A qui, 9/02/2017, 09:39, DelazJ <delazj at gmail.com
> <mailto: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 <mailto: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
>
> --
> Alexandre Neto
> ---------------------
> @AlexNetoGeo
> http://sigsemgrilhetas.wordpress.com
> http://gisunchained.wordpress.com
>
> --
> Alexandre Neto
> ---------------------
> @AlexNetoGeo
> http://sigsemgrilhetas.wordpress.com
> http://gisunchained.wordpress.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>
More information about the Qgis-developer
mailing list