[QGIS-Developer] Some thought on LTR

Alessandro Pasotti apasotti at gmail.com
Wed Oct 2 04:42:52 PDT 2019

On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 12:22 PM Even Rouault <even.rouault at spatialys.com>

> > And at this stage in the life of the LTR I just
> > don't see the risks of regressions outweighing anything but
> > crash/corruption fixes.
> "Stage" is the keyword here. Number of software vendors have generally
> several
> stages during the lifetime of the product they support, generally a first
> one
> which is the polishing of the release where they can even add new
> features,
> another one where they only backport (critical) bug fixes, and a final one
> where they only backport security related bug fixes.
> So, maybe we could have a 2 phase process:
> - First 6 months: backport of bug fixes with the same criteria as we do
> currently
> - Last 6 months: only critical bug fixes (crashes, data loss)
> (or 9 months / 3 months, whatever...)
This looks a good approach to me.

> But if we're really in that mode, that should not only apply to QGIS but
> to
> its dependent libraries as well. Basically this would mean that for
> OSGeo4W,
> you should have 2 distinct sets for the dependencies: one frozen (or with
> very
> controlled changes) for the LTR, and a living one for the new versions.
> Even

Yes, that makes sense too.

Alessandro Pasotti
w3:   www.itopen.it
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20191002/abb26f82/attachment.html>

More information about the QGIS-Developer mailing list