[QGIS-Developer] PROPOSAL: change how we manage the 3.0 release process

[Mathieu Pellerin]

I still think it's worth considering feature freeze exceptions ( versus a
feature freeze delay ). It'd be a shame for this debate/discussion not to
take place.

As for stability, I've had a rather positive experience with current master
builds in terms of stability. Hope you can dissect the issues that are
haunting you in time :)

Math

On Nov 6, 2017 7:53 PM, "Andreas Neumann" <a.neumann at carto.net> wrote:

> Well - in my opinion, if we delay the feature freeze we also have to delay
> the release.
>
> QGIS 3 still crashes several times a day (esp. if you work with editing,
> complex forms and PostgreSQL transaction mode). QGIS 3 is way more unstable
> than QGIS 2.18. We need at least 1.5 months, better 2 months between
> feature freeze and release. If we move feature freeze, say, until end of
> November, we can't release in December or we would loose the good
> reputation that QGIS built in the last couple of years.
>
> That is just my personal opinion. I use QGIS 3 a lot - and it is not a
> pleasant piece of software currently, but a major source of headaches and
> grief, not because of UI or missing features, but because of all the
> crashes I often experience (and are often hard to reproduce and report).
>
> Andreas
>
> On 2017-11-06 13:17, Mathieu Pellerin wrote:
>
> Hmm we just jumped from discussing feature freeze exception to delaying
> release, is that correct?
>
> Personally, I'm big +1 for feature freeze exceptions-only *if* release
> date remains achievable. If not, it seems there is a consensus on adding
> additional time to this dev cycle, which remains preferable to shipping 3.0
> with crucial architectural changes and additions missing.
>
> That said I'm a -1 to go into a "release whenever it's ready" mode without
> a firm agreed upon (delayed) release date.
>
> M
>
> On Nov 6, 2017 6:59 PM, "Andreas Neumann" <a.neumann at carto.net> wrote:
>
>> It would be nice if the core devs could agree on items that need to go
>> into 3.0 before feature freeze - so we don't have to delay longer than
>> necessary.
>>
>> The other question is how to deal with features that could also be done
>> in 3.2. Can they also go into 3.0 if they are ready before the feature
>> freeze? In other words: do we already have a feature freeze but allow
>> exceptions where core devs agree on? Or will the whole feature freeze be
>> delayed?
>>
>> Andreas
>>
>> On 2017-11-06 12:23, Matthias Kuhn wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jürgen,
>>
>> On 11/06/2017 11:17 AM, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote:
>>
>> Hi Matthias,
>>
>> On Mon, 06. Nov 2017 at 11:00:04 +0100, Matthias Kuhn wrote:
>>
>> Instead I would like the PSC to discuss a flexible handling of this
>> particular major release with the very specific requirements.
>>
>> The "release when ready" policy was made for 3.0 and only for 3.0.  The plan is
>> to return to the original way of doing release afterwards.
>>
>> That would have been my preference anyway and returning to it is ok with me.
>>
>>
>> Nice, looks like everyone agrees.
>> Can we schedule a release-plan meeting with involved devs to discuss
>> if/when it's ready?
>>
>> Thanks a lot
>> Matthias
>>
>> Although IIRC the move to a fixed date was made because others argued that they
>> need to communicate a date to their customers.
>>
>>
>> Jürgen
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> QGIS-Developer mailing listQGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20171106/281d7e57/attachment.html>