[QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] QGIS LTR releases -- is it time to pull the plug?

[Alexandre Neto]

Hello all,

On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 9:09 PM Andreas Neumann <andreas at qgis.org> wrote:

> - strictly separate the build systems and libraries of LTR and regular
> releases. Parts of the problem stem from the fact that during the lifetime
> of an LTR underlying libraries are updated. Ideally, the libraries of the
> LT releases only receive bug fixes, but no new features
> - put more resources into manual testing
> - put more resources into packaging in general
> - let every release be checked manually by a couple of dedicates power
> users (at least the LTR ones) before it goes out to the public
>
> I know - all of these need personal/financial resources.
>
> Andreas
>

Since resources are limited, another thing we may consider is to reduce the
number of releases per year.
If on top of that, we could add a packaging freeze period, it would be
possible to run installers' manual tests before they are released to the
general public.

Here are some test plans we prepared for QEP 180:

https://qgis.tenant.kiwitcms.org/plan/search/

These are only examples, we can think about more tests, especially things
that can't be caught by CI.

Best regards,

Alexandre Neto



> On Mon, 15 Nov 2021 at 20:57, Nyall Dawson <nyall.dawson at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi lists,
>>
>> I'd like to start some conversation about the dire condition of the
>> QGIS LTR release and what we can do to remedy/avoid this in future.
>>
>> If you've missed the conversation, our QGIS 3.16 windows releases have
>> been completely broken for nearly a month now. 3.16.12 had a critical
>> issue which caused lockups in Python code, and now 3.16.13 has
>> completely broken projection handling (resulting in loss of CRS,
>> hangups when opening projects, etc).
>>
>> So what do we do? I can think of a few responses we could make:
>>
>> - Kill 3.16.13 with fire. It needs to be removed from the website and
>> all traces of the internet ASAP. Rollback to only offering 3.16.11,
>> which is the last good Windows 3.16 release.
>>
>> - Put out a massive apology (and ask users to step up their funding to
>> better maintain QGIS releases in future ;)
>>
>> - Mark 3.16 as an early EOL. (I can't see anyone interested in
>> resolving the actual issue, so we've no way forward here in releasing
>> a "good" 3.16 release again.)
>>
>> - Write the LTR releases off as a failed concept. (i.e. if we don't
>> have the resources to maintain them properly, we shouldn't be offering
>> them at all and should resort back to the single maintained release at
>> any one time situation.)
>>
>> - Lower the supported period of a LTR release to 6 months?
>>
>> - Offer "theoretical" LTR releases ONLY as source code, but leave it
>> to users to compile themselves and accept responsibility for their own
>> packaging of this release.
>>
>> - Go on a funding drive so that QGIS can **pay** a developer and
>> packager so that we actually CAN say we have stable LTR releases
>> again?
>>
>> - ...something else...?
>>
>> Suffice to say, these are big issues, with big responses. But we're
>> also under extreme time pressure here -- 3.16 is broken beyond belief,
>> and we DO need to make some public responses asap (i.e. TODAY!!!!)
>>
>> Nyall
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qgis-psc mailing list
>> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>>
>
>
> --
>
> --
> Andreas Neumann
> QGIS.ORG board member (treasurer)
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20211116/e1b9491d/attachment.html>