[QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] QGIS Soft Feature Freeze Voting (was Re: QGIS 3 release expectations)

[DelazJ]

Hi,
There's a pull-request i'm missing in the list since the beginning:
https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/4305
I'm not sure it'd break an API, and it looks like a new feature but I think
it'd be a shame to not have it for 3.0. I don't know if Nathan has time to
work on it but this is a nice tool to help users migrate from 2.x to 3.0
easily. I'm not sure it will get enough sense in 3.2 when a lot of people
would have already (maybe) struggled to move their settings, unless I
overestimate the PR scope and there's already a migration process I did not
find.

Regards,
Harrissou

2017-11-28 3:11 GMT+01:00 Mathieu Pellerin <nirvn.asia at gmail.com>:

> +1 to all four PRs, especially the dynamic number value for processing one
> which I've tested quite a lot in the last 48 hours and couldn't detect any
> problem.
>
> On Nov 28, 2017 6:39 AM, "Nyall Dawson" <nyall.dawson at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 27 November 2017 at 08:32, Tim Sutton <tim at kartoza.com> wrote:
>> > The voting process is transparent but only qgis/QGIS core committers
>> may vote on it. Please note that if you are eligible you should have
>> received an invite email to join the loomio group. If you did not, please
>> contact me with your preferred email address and I will re-add you.
>> >
>>
>> Hi Tim,
>>
>> What's the process to get exemptions for open PRs? There's a couple
>> I'd like to see merged if it's agreeable:
>>
>> - https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/5600: "Add order by expression
>> processing algorithm". Very low risk - it's a self contained algorithm
>> on which nothing else depends. Processing in 3.0 is awesome, and has
>> made great strides to becoming a competitive ETL tool. This algorithm
>> would very nicely complement the work already done in 3.0 to make
>> models more powerful and flexible.
>>
>> - https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/5430: "More output format choices
>> in raster save as dialog": Low risk. Changes only affect the dialog,
>> and an extra convenience member in QgsRasterFileWriter (which is
>> accompanied by unit tests)
>>
>> - https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/5729: "[processing] Expose dynamic
>> ("data defined") numeric parameters to gui". Low-medium risk. Most of
>> the changes here are gui related, just exposing functionality which
>> already exists in the new processing backend (and which is covered by
>> stacks of unit tests). I'd love to see this included in 3.0 as it
>> changes some of the processing API, and I would like wider testing and
>> porting of algorithms to utilise this BEFORE the API is locked in
>> place and we're stuck with it. I'd rather identify any issues in the
>> related API here for 3.0. Additionally, the changes to the "set z
>> value" algorithm which allows the z value to be pulled from a field or
>> expression is extremely useful in preparing datasets for use in the
>> new 3d views. Plus, it's an absolute KILLER feature to have.
>>
>> - https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/5663: "Add a name for transactions
>> created from executeSql". It's marked as a feature and tagged as 3.2,
>> but looking over it it seems to be almost entirely api tweaks and a
>> unit test. I'd say this is low risk, especially given Paul's history
>> of stable commits and how well unit tested this are of code is
>> already.
>>
>> Nyall
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qgis-psc mailing list
>> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20171128/24449a69/attachment.html>