From valentin.buira at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 00:41:25 2026 From: valentin.buira at gmail.com (Valentin Buira) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2026 09:41:25 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] QEP 406: Introduce a data viewer for the model designer Message-ID: Hi devs, and happy new year to you all! I just posted a new QEP about introducing a data viewer in the model designer canvas from the. Please see: https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals/pull/359 This QEP aims to bring an integrated data viewer directly inside the model designer to inspect and debug the state of your model as you build them. Thanks for any feedback and cheers, Valentin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From benjamin.jakimow at geo.hu-berlin.de Thu Jan 8 02:35:46 2026 From: benjamin.jakimow at geo.hu-berlin.de (Benjamin Jakimow) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2026 11:35:46 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Creating & loading Qt6 resource files for python plugins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <15b39b09-e716-4270-887b-4e99a81412f4@geo.hu-berlin.de> Dear Experts, for our QGIS Python plugins we load icons into the Qt Resource system, so that they can be accessed as in QIcon(r':/myplugin/myicon.svg'). In PyQt5 / QGIS3 we do this by: 1. compiling myresource.qrc files into a myresource_rc.py file, either using pyrcc5 (on CLI) or qgis.PyQt.pyrcc_main (in Python). 2. loading these icons on plugin start-up, like in: import myresource_rc myresource_rc.qInitResources() It seems that in QGIS4 / Qt6 neither pyrcc5 nor qgis.PyQt.pyrcc_main is available (tested in OSGeo4W qgis-qt6 environment). It's possible to create *_rc.py files using pyside6-rcc, but they use from PySide6 import QtCore which is not available (e.g. in the current OSGeo4W qgis-qt6 environment). Does anyone have an idea how we can create Qt6-style *._rc.py files instead? Greetings, Benjamin On 08.01.26 09:41, Valentin Buira via QGIS-Developer wrote: > Hi devs, and happy new year to you all! > > I just posted a new QEP about introducing a data viewer in the model > designer canvas from the. Please see: https://github.com/qgis/QGIS- > Enhancement-Proposals/pull/359 Enhancement-Proposals/pull/359> > > This QEP aims to bring an integrated data viewer directly inside the > model designer to inspect and debug the state of your model as you build > them. > > Thanks for any feedback and cheers, > Valentin > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- Dr. Benjamin Jakimow Earth Observation Lab | Geography Department | Humboldt-Universit?t zu Berlin e-mail: benjamin.jakimow at geo.hu-berlin.de phone: +49 (0) 30 2093 45846 mobile: +49 (0) 157 5656 8477 mail: Unter den Linden 6 | 10099 Berlin | Germany matrix: @jakimowb:hu-berlin.de web: https://eolab.geographie.hu-berlin.de/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4284 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From delazj at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 02:58:55 2026 From: delazj at gmail.com (DelazJ) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2026 11:58:55 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Creating & loading Qt6 resource files for python plugins In-Reply-To: <15b39b09-e716-4270-887b-4e99a81412f4@geo.hu-berlin.de> References: <15b39b09-e716-4270-887b-4e99a81412f4@geo.hu-berlin.de> Message-ID: Hi Benjamin, using rcc command (available in qt6-devel in OSGeo4w) should do the trick. See https://docs.qgis.org/testing/en/docs/pyqgis_developer_cookbook/plugins/plugins.html#resource-file or https://stackoverflow.com/questions/66099225/how-can-resources-be-provided-in-pyqt6-which-has-no-pyrcc Greetings, Harrissou Le jeu. 8 janv. 2026 ? 11:43, Benjamin Jakimow via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : > Dear Experts, > > for our QGIS Python plugins we load icons into the Qt Resource system, > so that they can be accessed as in QIcon(r':/myplugin/myicon.svg'). > > In PyQt5 / QGIS3 we do this by: > 1. compiling myresource.qrc files into a myresource_rc.py file, either > using pyrcc5 (on CLI) or qgis.PyQt.pyrcc_main (in Python). > 2. loading these icons on plugin start-up, like in: > > import myresource_rc > myresource_rc.qInitResources() > > It seems that in QGIS4 / Qt6 neither pyrcc5 nor qgis.PyQt.pyrcc_main is > available (tested in OSGeo4W qgis-qt6 environment). > > It's possible to create *_rc.py files using pyside6-rcc, but they use > from PySide6 import QtCore > which is not available (e.g. in the current OSGeo4W qgis-qt6 environment). > > Does anyone have an idea how we can create Qt6-style *._rc.py files > instead? > > Greetings, Benjamin > > > > On 08.01.26 09:41, Valentin Buira via QGIS-Developer wrote: > > Hi devs, and happy new year to you all! > > > > I just posted a new QEP about introducing a data viewer in the model > > designer canvas from the. Please see: https://github.com/qgis/QGIS- > > Enhancement-Proposals/pull/359 > Enhancement-Proposals/pull/359> > > > > This QEP aims to bring an integrated data viewer directly inside the > > model designer to inspect and debug the state of your model as you build > > them. > > > > Thanks for any feedback and cheers, > > Valentin > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > -- > Dr. Benjamin Jakimow > Earth Observation Lab | Geography Department | Humboldt-Universit?t zu > Berlin > > e-mail: benjamin.jakimow at geo.hu-berlin.de > > phone: +49 (0) 30 2093 45846 > mobile: +49 (0) 157 5656 8477 > > mail: Unter den Linden 6 | 10099 Berlin | Germany > matrix: @jakimowb:hu-berlin.de > web: https://eolab.geographie.hu-berlin.de/ > > _______________________________________________ > 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: From etienne.trimaille at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 03:21:45 2026 From: etienne.trimaille at gmail.com (Etienne Trimaille) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2026 12:21:45 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Creating & loading Qt6 resource files for python plugins In-Reply-To: <15b39b09-e716-4270-887b-4e99a81412f4@geo.hu-berlin.de> References: <15b39b09-e716-4270-887b-4e99a81412f4@geo.hu-berlin.de> Message-ID: Hi, Quite a few developers, like me as well, are not using resource files anymore. It's more simple, no need to compile resource files etc. It's just my opinion. You can just use pathlib, for instance : - Define a variable at the root of your plugin : DIR_PLUGIN_ROOT = Path(__file__).parent Then call it when you want with an icon : QIcon(str(DIR_PLUGIN_ROOT / "resources/icons/logo.svg")) Regards, Le jeu. 8 janv. 2026 ? 11:43, Benjamin Jakimow via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : > Dear Experts, > > for our QGIS Python plugins we load icons into the Qt Resource system, > so that they can be accessed as in QIcon(r':/myplugin/myicon.svg'). > > In PyQt5 / QGIS3 we do this by: > 1. compiling myresource.qrc files into a myresource_rc.py file, either > using pyrcc5 (on CLI) or qgis.PyQt.pyrcc_main (in Python). > 2. loading these icons on plugin start-up, like in: > > import myresource_rc > myresource_rc.qInitResources() > > It seems that in QGIS4 / Qt6 neither pyrcc5 nor qgis.PyQt.pyrcc_main is > available (tested in OSGeo4W qgis-qt6 environment). > > It's possible to create *_rc.py files using pyside6-rcc, but they use > from PySide6 import QtCore > which is not available (e.g. in the current OSGeo4W qgis-qt6 environment). > > Does anyone have an idea how we can create Qt6-style *._rc.py files > instead? > > Greetings, Benjamin > > > > On 08.01.26 09:41, Valentin Buira via QGIS-Developer wrote: > > Hi devs, and happy new year to you all! > > > > I just posted a new QEP about introducing a data viewer in the model > > designer canvas from the. Please see: https://github.com/qgis/QGIS- > > Enhancement-Proposals/pull/359 > Enhancement-Proposals/pull/359> > > > > This QEP aims to bring an integrated data viewer directly inside the > > model designer to inspect and debug the state of your model as you build > > them. > > > > Thanks for any feedback and cheers, > > Valentin > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > -- > Dr. Benjamin Jakimow > Earth Observation Lab | Geography Department | Humboldt-Universit?t zu > Berlin > > e-mail: benjamin.jakimow at geo.hu-berlin.de > > phone: +49 (0) 30 2093 45846 > mobile: +49 (0) 157 5656 8477 > > mail: Unter den Linden 6 | 10099 Berlin | Germany > matrix: @jakimowb:hu-berlin.de > web: https://eolab.geographie.hu-berlin.de/ > > _______________________________________________ > 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: From julien.cabieces at oslandia.com Thu Jan 8 06:07:55 2026 From: julien.cabieces at oslandia.com (Julien Cabieces) Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2026 15:07:55 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] QEP 406: Markers/Hashes line symbol layer extra items In-Reply-To: <878qfmqrrd.fsf@julienlaptop.home> (Julien Cabieces via's message of "Mon, 01 Dec 2025 14:02:46 +0100") References: <878qfmqrrd.fsf@julienlaptop.home> Message-ID: <87tswwxkn8.fsf@julienlaptop.home> Hi all, Best wishes for 2026! This proposal has passed the two weeks discussion period and is now opened to vote. You can vote here : https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals/pull/356 Regards, Julien > Hi, > > I just opened a new QEP proposal regarding the definition of > markers/hashes line symbol layer extra items: https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals/pull/356 > > Review comments are welcome. > > Regards, > Julien -- Julien Cabieces Senior Developer at Oslandia julien.cabieces at oslandia.com From valentin.buira at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 06:14:14 2026 From: valentin.buira at gmail.com (Valentin Buira) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2026 15:14:14 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] QEP 406: Introduce a data viewer for the model designer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Erratum QEP 407, everything else still stand Le jeu. 8 janv. 2026 ? 09:41, Valentin Buira a ?crit : > Hi devs, and happy new year to you all! > > I just posted a new QEP about introducing a data viewer in the model > designer canvas from the. Please see: > https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals/pull/359 > > This QEP aims to bring an integrated data viewer directly inside the model > designer to inspect and debug the state of your model as you build them. > > Thanks for any feedback and cheers, > Valentin > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nyall.dawson at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 13:21:32 2026 From: nyall.dawson at gmail.com (Nyall Dawson) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2026 07:21:32 +1000 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? Message-ID: Hi list, I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze date by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? I've personally got a few features I'd like to squeeze in for 4.0, but aside from that, we have a huge number of feature PRs still needing review (or a lot of work). I'm anticipating that many more will be opened next week too, given the number of feature QEPs we've seen + features I know others are actively working on for 4.0. Thanks for the consideration! Nyall From ujaval at spatialthoughts.com Thu Jan 8 20:17:45 2026 From: ujaval at spatialthoughts.com (Ujaval Gandhi) Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2026 04:17:45 +0000 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Creating & loading Qt6 resource files for python plugins In-Reply-To: References: <15b39b09-e716-4270-887b-4e99a81412f4@geo.hu-berlin.de> Message-ID: I also do not use the?resource files anymore. You can use the logo directly in plugins without compilation as shown by Etienne which makes the development much simpler. --- Ujaval Gandhi Spatial Thoughts www.spatialthoughts.com [http://www.spatialthoughts.com] On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 4:52?PM Etienne Trimaille via QGIS-Developer wrote: > Hi, > > > Quite a few developers, like me as well, are not using resource files anymore. > It's more simple, no need to compile resource files etc. It's just my opinion. > > > You can just use pathlib, for instance :? > * Define a variable at the root of your plugin :? > > DIR_PLUGIN_ROOT = Path(__file__).parent > > > Then call it when you want with an icon :? > QIcon(str(DIR_PLUGIN_ROOT / "resources/icons/logo.svg")) > > > Regards, > > [] > Le?jeu. 8 janv. 2026 ??11:43, Benjamin Jakimow via QGIS-Developer > a ?crit?: > > > > Dear Experts, > > > > for our QGIS Python plugins we load icons into the Qt Resource system, > > so that they can be accessed as in QIcon(r':/myplugin/myicon.svg'). > > > > In PyQt5 / QGIS3 we do this by: > > 1. compiling myresource.qrc files into a myresource_rc.py file, either > > using pyrcc5 (on CLI) or qgis.PyQt.pyrcc_main (in Python). > > 2. loading these icons on plugin start-up, like in: > > > > ? ?import myresource_rc > > ? ?myresource_rc.qInitResources() > > > > It seems that in QGIS4 / Qt6 neither pyrcc5 nor qgis.PyQt.pyrcc_main is > > available (tested in OSGeo4W qgis-qt6 environment). > > > > It's possible to create *_rc.py files using pyside6-rcc, but they use > > from PySide6 import QtCore > > which is not available (e.g. in the current OSGeo4W qgis-qt6 environment). > > > > Does anyone have an idea how we can create Qt6-style *._rc.py files > > instead? > > > > Greetings, Benjamin > > > > > > > > On 08.01.26 09:41, Valentin Buira via QGIS-Developer wrote: > > > Hi devs, and happy new year to you all! > > > > > > I just posted a new QEP about introducing a data viewer in the model > > > designer canvas from the. Please see: https://github.com/qgis/QGIS- > > [https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-] > > > Enhancement-Proposals/pull/359 > [https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-] > > > Enhancement-Proposals/pull/359> > > > > > > This QEP aims to bring an integrated data viewer directly inside the > > > model designer to inspect and debug the state of your model as you build > > > them. > > > > > > Thanks for any feedback and cheers, > > > Valentin > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > QGIS-Developer mailing list > > > QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org [QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org] > > > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > > [https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer] > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > > [https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer] > > > > -- > > Dr. Benjamin Jakimow > > Earth Observation Lab | Geography Department | Humboldt-Universit?t zu > > Berlin > > > > e-mail: benjamin.jakimow at geo.hu-berlin.de > > [benjamin.jakimow at geo.hu-berlin.de] > > > > phone:? +49 (0) 30 2093 45846 > > mobile: +49 (0) 157 5656 8477 > > > > mail:? ?Unter den Linden 6 | 10099 Berlin | Germany > > matrix: @jakimowb:hu-berlin.de [http://hu-berlin.de] > > web:? ? https://eolab.geographie.hu-berlin.de/ > > [https://eolab.geographie.hu-berlin.de/] > > > > _______________________________________________ > > QGIS-Developer mailing list > > QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org [QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org] > > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > > [https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > > [https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer] > > _______________________________________________ > QGIS-Developer mailing list > QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org [QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org] > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > [https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > [https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lova at kartoza.com Fri Jan 9 06:00:00 2026 From: lova at kartoza.com (Lova Andriarimalala) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2026 17:00:00 +0300 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS Full Stack Developer Report from December 2025 to January 9, 2026 Message-ID: Hello everyone, and happy new year! During December last year, we mainly focused on improving the infrastructure, particularly on the download side. We also made improvements to some parts of the websites and continued on that early this week: *QGIS Infrastructure:* - Implement a load balancing for downloads (Windows and macOs) for improved performance - Redirect download archives and Linux (Ubuntu/Debian) packages to the S3 bucket *QGIS.org:* - Downloads listing page [Deployed] - Use the new download server [Deployed] - Add Linux (Debian/Ubuntu) Packages Explorer [Deployed] *QGIS Plugins:* - Fix for SSL Certificates Renewal [Deployed] - Implement soft delete functionality for plugins and versions [Deployed] - Update Matomo site ID [Deployed] - Filter XML plugins for QGIS 4.x [Deployed] - Add support for multiple image attachments in feedback forms [Deployed] *QGIS Hub:* - Increase QLR and style size limit to 5MB [New PR] - Add upload size limit in each resource type [Deployed] - Fix SSL certificate renewal automation [Deployed] *QGIS Feed:* - Enhance image preview functionality by adding cropping and scaling [New PR] Have a nice weekend. Lova Andriarimalala *QGIS Full Stack Developer * *T *: +27(0) 87 809 2702 *E *: lova at kartoza.com *W* : kartoza.com *This email and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you * *have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete it from your system. Unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying* *of the contents is prohibited.* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From denis.rouzaud at gmail.com Fri Jan 9 07:16:34 2026 From: denis.rouzaud at gmail.com (Denis Rouzaud) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2026 16:16:34 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Nyall, hi all, For what it's worth, It's okay for me :) But I would recommend decoupling the submission from the merge deadlines. We've partially done that in the past with the "Freeze exempt" tag, but I would make it a de facto standard to reduce the pressure on reviewers and avoid pressing merges. So anything that is somehow in a ready state in a week should automatically gets 2 more weeks to get merged? Sorry, if this is already the case, but I couldn't find any trace of these rules. A place for a new QEP maybe. Happy New Feature Freeze :) Denis Le jeu. 8 janv. 2026 ? 22:21, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC < qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : > Hi list, > > I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze date > by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? > > I've personally got a few features I'd like to squeeze in for 4.0, but > aside from that, we have a huge number of feature PRs still needing > review (or a lot of work). I'm anticipating that many more will be > opened next week too, given the number of feature QEPs we've seen + > features I know others are actively working on for 4.0. > > Thanks for the consideration! > Nyall > _______________________________________________ > 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: From regis.haubourg at gmail.com Fri Jan 9 13:18:44 2026 From: regis.haubourg at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9gis_Haubourg?=) Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2026 22:18:44 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS Full Stack Developer Report from December 2025 to January 9, 2026 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Lova and best wishes to you. As usual, I am very impressed by the quality and quantity of good things you bring to the project. It is a real pleasure to have you onboard and collaborate with you. Merci infiniment R?gis Le 9 janvier 2026 15:00:00 GMT+01:00, Lova Andriarimalala via QGIS-Developer a ?crit?: >Hello everyone, and happy new year! > >During December last year, we mainly focused on improving the >infrastructure, particularly on the download side. We also made >improvements to some parts of the websites and continued on that early this >week: > >*QGIS Infrastructure:* > > - Implement a load balancing for downloads (Windows and macOs) for > improved performance > - Redirect download archives and Linux (Ubuntu/Debian) packages to the > S3 bucket > >*QGIS.org:* > > - Downloads listing page > [Deployed] > - Use the new download server > [Deployed] > - Add Linux (Debian/Ubuntu) Packages Explorer > [Deployed] > >*QGIS Plugins:* > > - Fix for SSL Certificates Renewal > [Deployed] > - Implement soft delete functionality for plugins and versions > [Deployed] > - Update Matomo site ID > [Deployed] > - Filter XML plugins for QGIS 4.x > [Deployed] > - Add support for multiple image attachments in feedback forms > [Deployed] > >*QGIS Hub:* > > - Increase QLR and style size limit to 5MB > [New PR] > - Add upload size limit in each resource type > [Deployed] > - Fix SSL certificate renewal automation > [Deployed] > >*QGIS Feed:* > > - Enhance image preview functionality by adding cropping and scaling > [New PR] > > >Have a nice weekend. > >Lova Andriarimalala > > >*QGIS Full Stack Developer * >*T *: +27(0) 87 809 2702 *E *: lova at kartoza.com *W* : >kartoza.com > > > >*This email and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for >the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you * >*have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately >and delete it from your system. Unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying* >*of the contents is prohibited.* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lova at kartoza.com Fri Jan 9 19:44:46 2026 From: lova at kartoza.com (Lova Andriarimalala) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2026 06:44:46 +0300 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS Full Stack Developer Report from December 2025 to January 9, 2026 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi R?gis, Thank you so much for your kind words. It?s a pleasure to be part of the amazing project. Best regards, Lova Andriarimalala *QGIS Full Stack Developer * *T *: +27(0) 87 809 2702 *E *: lova at kartoza.com *W* : kartoza.com *This email and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you * *have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete it from your system. Unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying* *of the contents is prohibited.* R?gis Haubourg schrieb am Sa. 10. Jan. 2026 um 12:18?AM: > Hi Lova and best wishes to you. > As usual, I am very impressed by the quality and quantity of good things > you bring to the project. > It is a real pleasure to have you onboard and collaborate with you. > Merci infiniment > R?gis > > > Le 9 janvier 2026 15:00:00 GMT+01:00, Lova Andriarimalala via > QGIS-Developer a ?crit : > >> Hello everyone, and happy new year! >> >> During December last year, we mainly focused on improving the >> infrastructure, particularly on the download side. We also made >> improvements to some parts of the websites and continued on that early this >> week: >> >> *QGIS Infrastructure:* >> >> - Implement a load balancing for downloads (Windows and macOs) for >> improved performance >> - Redirect download archives and Linux (Ubuntu/Debian) packages to >> the S3 bucket >> >> *QGIS.org:* >> >> - Downloads listing page >> [Deployed] >> - Use the new download server >> [Deployed] >> - Add Linux (Debian/Ubuntu) Packages Explorer >> [Deployed] >> >> *QGIS Plugins:* >> >> - Fix for SSL Certificates Renewal >> [Deployed] >> - Implement soft delete functionality for plugins and versions >> [Deployed] >> - Update Matomo site ID >> [Deployed] >> - Filter XML plugins for QGIS 4.x >> [Deployed] >> - Add support for multiple image attachments in feedback forms >> [Deployed] >> >> *QGIS Hub:* >> >> - Increase QLR and style size limit to 5MB >> [New PR] >> - Add upload size limit in each resource type >> [Deployed] >> - Fix SSL certificate renewal automation >> [Deployed] >> >> *QGIS Feed:* >> >> - Enhance image preview functionality by adding cropping and scaling >> [New PR] >> >> >> Have a nice weekend. >> >> Lova Andriarimalala >> >> >> *QGIS Full Stack Developer * >> *T *: +27(0) 87 809 2702 *E *: lova at kartoza.com *W* : >> kartoza.com >> >> >> >> *This email and any attachments are confidential and intended solely for >> the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you * >> *have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately >> and delete it from your system. Unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying* >> *of the contents is prohibited.* >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nyall.dawson at gmail.com Mon Jan 12 12:22:03 2026 From: nyall.dawson at gmail.com (Nyall Dawson) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2026 06:22:03 +1000 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, 10 Jan 2026 at 01:16, Denis Rouzaud wrote: > > Hi Nyall, hi all, > > For what it's worth, It's okay for me :) > > But I would recommend decoupling the submission from the merge deadlines. > We've partially done that in the past with the "Freeze exempt" tag, but I would make it a de facto standard to reduce the pressure on reviewers and avoid pressing merges. > So anything that is somehow in a ready state in a week should automatically gets 2 more weeks to get merged? +1, however I do have a reservation in that this has tended to lend itself to a flood of very rough draft last minute PRs being submitted on the days just before freeze. In any case, I'm asking here for an additional 1.5 weeks BEFORE the usual freeze rules / exemptions kick in. > > Sorry, if this is already the case, but I couldn't find any trace of these rules. A place for a new QEP maybe. Right -- we definitely do need to document these policies somewhere. Maybe I'll try for that during freeze ;) Nyall > > Happy New Feature Freeze :) > > Denis > > Le jeu. 8 janv. 2026 ? 22:21, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC a ?crit : >> >> Hi list, >> >> I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze date >> by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? >> >> I've personally got a few features I'd like to squeeze in for 4.0, but >> aside from that, we have a huge number of feature PRs still needing >> review (or a lot of work). I'm anticipating that many more will be >> opened next week too, given the number of feature QEPs we've seen + >> features I know others are actively working on for 4.0. >> >> Thanks for the consideration! >> Nyall >> _______________________________________________ >> QGIS-PSC mailing list >> QGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.org >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc From jean.felder at oslandia.com Tue Jan 13 01:12:51 2026 From: jean.felder at oslandia.com (Jean Felder) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2026 10:12:51 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] QEP 322: Point layer edition from the profile tool Message-ID: <4947d9ed-b730-45d4-b6dd-236e1ef62f8e@oslandia.com> Hi, Thank you for all your feedback; it has been taken into account in the QEP. It is now opened to vote: https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals/pull/328 Regards, Jean -- Jean Felder D?veloppeur SIG Oslandia -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: OpenPGP_0x12722DC64D3F429E.asc Type: application/pgp-keys Size: 2444 bytes Desc: OpenPGP public key URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 665 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From wonder.sk at gmail.com Tue Jan 13 07:23:37 2026 From: wonder.sk at gmail.com (Martin Dobias) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2026 16:23:37 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi all On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 10:21?PM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC < qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > > I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze date > by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? > > +1 from me. I also quite like the idea from Denis to have some basic rules about PRs landing shortly before feature freeze... Cheers Martin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From voting at qgis.org Tue Jan 13 16:41:44 2026 From: voting at qgis.org (Voting Officer) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2026 08:41:44 +0800 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Community Voting Members Election 2026: Schedule and Call for Nominations Message-ID: Dear QGIS Community, With the addition of the Tanzania User Group in 2025, we now have 34 country-level user groups. The QGIS Charter calls for an equal number of ?Community Voting Members? (we have 33), so we?re kicking off an election for one new voting member. This year?s election will aim to follow this schedule: - 14 Jan - 27 Jan: Call for Nominations - 28 Jan - 10 Feb: Voting - 11 -13 Feb: Tally votes & verification of results - 14 Feb: Announce results **Call for Nominations** We invite nominations for one Community Voting Member. Any active QGIS community member is eligible to be nominated. Only QGIS Committers (?any person who has been granted commit access in any of the official QGIS repositories?) are eligible to make nominations. This includes committers to any QGIS Git repository or Transifex project. Before making a nomination, please confirm you?re eligible, and check with the person you?re nominating to make sure they are willing. You can submit your nominations until **23:59 UTC on 27 January 2026** here: https://forms.gle/hQdQq1hSMRVHHQWQA If you play an organisational role (e.g. documentation lead, translation lead), kindly forward this email to your committers to ensure broad participation. For further details, visit the QGIS community organisation page . If you have any questions about the process, please don?t hesitate to contact me. Thank you for your continued engagement! Cheers John Bryant QGIS Voting Officer -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nyall.dawson at gmail.com Wed Jan 14 18:50:02 2026 From: nyall.dawson at gmail.com (Nyall Dawson) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 12:50:02 +1000 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 14 Jan 2026 at 01:23, Martin Dobias wrote: > > Hi all > > On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 10:21?PM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC wrote: >> >> >> I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze date >> by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? >> > > +1 from me. So do we consider this locked in now? Freeze moved to 27th Jan? Nyall From andreas at qgis.org Wed Jan 14 22:00:11 2026 From: andreas at qgis.org (Andreas Neumann) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 07:00:11 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: +1 - to have a voice from PSC ;-) Andreas On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 03:50, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > On Wed, 14 Jan 2026 at 01:23, Martin Dobias wrote: > > > > Hi all > > > > On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 10:21?PM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC < > qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > >> > >> > >> I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze date > >> by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? > >> > > > > +1 from me. > > So do we consider this locked in now? Freeze moved to 27th Jan? > > Nyall > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- -- Andreas Neumann QGIS.ORG board member (treasurer) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From matthias at opengis.ch Wed Jan 14 22:34:43 2026 From: matthias at opengis.ch (Matthias Kuhn) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 07:34:43 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, +1 from me too For the record: this only affects feature freeze, the release date stays unchanged? Matthias On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 7:00?AM Andreas Neumann via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > +1 - to have a voice from PSC ;-) > > Andreas > > > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 03:50, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer < > qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > >> On Wed, 14 Jan 2026 at 01:23, Martin Dobias wrote: >> > >> > Hi all >> > >> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 10:21?PM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC < >> qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze date >> >> by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? >> >> >> > >> > +1 from me. >> >> So do we consider this locked in now? Freeze moved to 27th Jan? >> >> Nyall >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > -- > > -- > Andreas Neumann > QGIS.ORG board member (treasurer) > _______________________________________________ > 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: From nyall.dawson at gmail.com Wed Jan 14 22:37:09 2026 From: nyall.dawson at gmail.com (Nyall Dawson) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 16:37:09 +1000 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 16:00, Andreas Neumann wrote: > > +1 - to have a voice from PSC ;-) Perfect, thanks Andreas! Nyall > > Andreas > > > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 03:50, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer wrote: >> >> On Wed, 14 Jan 2026 at 01:23, Martin Dobias wrote: >> > >> > Hi all >> > >> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 10:21?PM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze date >> >> by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? >> >> >> > >> > +1 from me. >> >> So do we consider this locked in now? Freeze moved to 27th Jan? >> >> Nyall >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > > > -- > > -- > Andreas Neumann > QGIS.ORG board member (treasurer) From uclaros at gmail.com Wed Jan 14 23:01:18 2026 From: uclaros at gmail.com (Stefanos Natsis) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 09:01:18 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm also +1, however I'm slightly worried that we should somehow compensate for the reduced testing/bugfixing time of this feature-rich release. Best Stefanos On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 08:37, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 16:00, Andreas Neumann wrote: > > > > +1 - to have a voice from PSC ;-) > > Perfect, thanks Andreas! > > Nyall > > > > > Andreas > > > > > > > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 03:50, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer < > qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, 14 Jan 2026 at 01:23, Martin Dobias > wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi all > >> > > >> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 10:21?PM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC < > qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze date > >> >> by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? > >> >> > >> > > >> > +1 from me. > >> > >> So do we consider this locked in now? Freeze moved to 27th Jan? > >> > >> Nyall > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > > > > > > > -- > > > > -- > > Andreas Neumann > > QGIS.ORG board member (treasurer) > _______________________________________________ > 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: From julien.cabieces at oslandia.com Wed Jan 14 23:43:27 2026 From: julien.cabieces at oslandia.com (Julien Cabieces) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 08:43:27 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? In-Reply-To: (Stefanos Natsis via's message of "Thu, 15 Jan 2026 09:01:18 +0200") References: Message-ID: <877btjwcbk.fsf@julienlaptop.home> Hi all, +1 also, but I share Stefanos concerns. Would it be better to delay the release ? Regards, Julien > I'm also +1, however I'm slightly worried that we should somehow compensate for the reduced testing/bugfixing time of this feature-rich > release. > > Best > Stefanos > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 08:37, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer wrote: > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 16:00, Andreas Neumann wrote: > > > > +1 - to have a voice from PSC ;-) > > Perfect, thanks Andreas! > > Nyall > > > > > Andreas > > > > > > > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 03:50, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, 14 Jan 2026 at 01:23, Martin Dobias wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi all > >> > > >> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 10:21?PM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze date > >> >> by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? > >> >> > >> > > >> > +1 from me. > >> > >> So do we consider this locked in now? Freeze moved to 27th Jan? > >> > >> Nyall > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > > > > > > > -- > > > > -- > > Andreas Neumann > > QGIS.ORG board member (treasurer) > _______________________________________________ > 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-PSC mailing list > QGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc -- Julien Cabieces Senior Developer at Oslandia julien.cabieces at oslandia.com From a.neumann at carto.net Thu Jan 15 01:30:46 2026 From: a.neumann at carto.net (Andreas Neumann) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 10:30:46 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <95de44943cf0e9af2a871ca05b4e5f3a@carto.net> Hi all, Regarding testing/bugfixing. I hope and I assume that companies and organizations wouldn't have the idea to base their mission critical work on a .0 release ... but rather wait for the next LT version or a couple of patch releases until QGIS 4.x can mature further. Andreas On 2026-01-15 08:01, Stefanos Natsis via QGIS-PSC wrote: > I'm also +1, however I'm slightly worried that we should somehow > compensate for the reduced testing/bugfixing time of this feature-rich > release. > > Best > Stefanos > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 08:37, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer > wrote: > >> On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 16:00, Andreas Neumann >> wrote: >>> >>> +1 - to have a voice from PSC ;-) >> >> Perfect, thanks Andreas! >> >> Nyall >> >>> >>> Andreas >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 03:50, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Wed, 14 Jan 2026 at 01:23, Martin Dobias >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi all >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 10:21?PM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze >>>>>> date >>>>>> by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> +1 from me. >>>> >>>> So do we consider this locked in now? Freeze moved to 27th Jan? >>>> >>>> Nyall >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> -- >>> Andreas Neumann >>> QGIS.ORG [1] board member (treasurer) >> _______________________________________________ >> 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-PSC mailing list > QGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc Links: ------ [1] http://QGIS.ORG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nyall.dawson at gmail.com Thu Jan 15 16:49:16 2026 From: nyall.dawson at gmail.com (Nyall Dawson) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 10:49:16 +1000 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? In-Reply-To: <95de44943cf0e9af2a871ca05b4e5f3a@carto.net> References: <95de44943cf0e9af2a871ca05b4e5f3a@carto.net> Message-ID: On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 19:30, Andreas Neumann wrote: > > Hi all, > > Regarding testing/bugfixing. > > I hope and I assume that companies and organizations wouldn't have the idea to base their mission critical work on a .0 release ... but rather wait for the next LT version or a couple of patch releases until QGIS 4.x can mature further. Definitely -- it's not going to be anywhere NEAR enterprise ready ?. (I just ran into the known issue where the qt6 builds can corrupt your user profiles... someone should probably look into that one sometime!) Nyall > > Andreas > > On 2026-01-15 08:01, Stefanos Natsis via QGIS-PSC wrote: > > I'm also +1, however I'm slightly worried that we should somehow compensate for the reduced testing/bugfixing time of this feature-rich release. > > Best > Stefanos > > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 08:37, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 16:00, Andreas Neumann wrote: > > > > +1 - to have a voice from PSC ;-) > > Perfect, thanks Andreas! > > Nyall > > > > > Andreas > > > > > > > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 03:50, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, 14 Jan 2026 at 01:23, Martin Dobias wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi all > >> > > >> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 10:21?PM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC < qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze date > >> >> by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? > >> >> > >> > > >> > +1 from me. > >> > >> So do we consider this locked in now? Freeze moved to 27th Jan? > >> > >> Nyall > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > > > > > > > -- > > > > -- > > Andreas Neumann > > QGIS.ORG board member (treasurer) > _______________________________________________ > 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-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: From regis.haubourg at gmail.com Thu Jan 15 23:31:40 2026 From: regis.haubourg at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9gis_Haubourg?=) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 08:31:40 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? In-Reply-To: References: <95de44943cf0e9af2a871ca05b4e5f3a@carto.net> Message-ID: <170E1E3B-0B19-4BCA-8FB5-34F3976CA97F@gmail.com> Well, my IT department updates packages in our software portal whenever they ... want or users ask. Maybe we should explicitly name 4.0 "release candidate" in the package names and our communication if 4.0 is that broken. Regis Le 16 janvier 2026 01:49:16 GMT+01:00, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC a ?crit?: >On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 19:30, Andreas Neumann wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> Regarding testing/bugfixing. >> >> I hope and I assume that companies and organizations wouldn't have the >idea to base their mission critical work on a .0 release ... but rather >wait for the next LT version or a couple of patch releases until QGIS 4.x >can mature further. > >Definitely -- it's not going to be anywhere NEAR enterprise ready ?. (I >just ran into the known issue where the qt6 builds can corrupt your user >profiles... someone should probably look into that one sometime!) > >Nyall > >> >> Andreas >> >> On 2026-01-15 08:01, Stefanos Natsis via QGIS-PSC wrote: >> >> I'm also +1, however I'm slightly worried that we should somehow >compensate for the reduced testing/bugfixing time of this feature-rich >release. >> >> Best >> Stefanos >> >> >> On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 08:37, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer < >qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 16:00, Andreas Neumann wrote: >> > >> > +1 - to have a voice from PSC ;-) >> >> Perfect, thanks Andreas! >> >> Nyall >> >> > >> > Andreas >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 03:50, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer < >qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wed, 14 Jan 2026 at 01:23, Martin Dobias >wrote: >> >> > >> >> > Hi all >> >> > >> >> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 10:21?PM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC < >qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze date >> >> >> by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > +1 from me. >> >> >> >> So do we consider this locked in now? Freeze moved to 27th Jan? >> >> >> >> Nyall >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> 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 >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > >> > -- >> > Andreas Neumann >> > QGIS.ORG board member (treasurer) >> _______________________________________________ >> 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-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: From a.neumann at carto.net Thu Jan 15 23:43:40 2026 From: a.neumann at carto.net (Andreas Neumann) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 08:43:40 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? In-Reply-To: <170E1E3B-0B19-4BCA-8FB5-34F3976CA97F@gmail.com> References: <95de44943cf0e9af2a871ca05b4e5f3a@carto.net> <170E1E3B-0B19-4BCA-8FB5-34F3976CA97F@gmail.com> Message-ID: <8ff08220f97b5918914b8bdeca61ded5@carto.net> Hi, I would label it "Release candidate" until 4.2 is released. Andreas On 2026-01-16 08:31, R?gis Haubourg wrote: > Well, my IT department updates packages in our software portal > whenever they ... want or users ask. > > Maybe we should explicitly name 4.0 "release candidate" in the package > names and our communication if 4.0 is that broken. > Regis > > Le 16 janvier 2026 01:49:16 GMT+01:00, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC > a ?crit : > >> On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 19:30, Andreas Neumann >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Regarding testing/bugfixing. >>> >>> I hope and I assume that companies and organizations wouldn't have >>> the idea to base their mission critical work on a .0 release ... but >>> rather wait for the next LT version or a couple of patch releases >>> until QGIS 4.x can mature further. >> >> Definitely -- it's not going to be anywhere NEAR enterprise ready ?. >> (I just ran into the known issue where the qt6 builds can corrupt your >> user profiles... someone should probably look into that one sometime!) >> >> Nyall >> >>> >>> Andreas >>> >>> On 2026-01-15 08:01, Stefanos Natsis via QGIS-PSC wrote: >>> >>> I'm also +1, however I'm slightly worried that we should somehow >>> compensate for the reduced testing/bugfixing time of this >>> feature-rich release. >>> >>> Best >>> Stefanos >>> >>> >>> On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 08:37, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer >>> wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 16:00, Andreas Neumann >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> +1 - to have a voice from PSC ;-) >>> >>> Perfect, thanks Andreas! >>> >>> Nyall >>> >>>> >>>> Andreas >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 03:50, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, 14 Jan 2026 at 01:23, Martin Dobias >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi all >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 10:21?PM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze >>>>>>> date >>>>>>> by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 from me. >>>>> >>>>> So do we consider this locked in now? Freeze moved to 27th Jan? >>>>> >>>>> Nyall >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Andreas Neumann >>>> QGIS.ORG [1] board member (treasurer) >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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-PSC mailing list >>> QGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.org >>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc >>> >>> Links: ------ [1] http://QGIS.ORG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From uclaros at gmail.com Thu Jan 15 23:46:31 2026 From: uclaros at gmail.com (Stefanos Natsis) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 09:46:31 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? In-Reply-To: <170E1E3B-0B19-4BCA-8FB5-34F3976CA97F@gmail.com> References: <95de44943cf0e9af2a871ca05b4e5f3a@carto.net> <170E1E3B-0B19-4BCA-8FB5-34F3976CA97F@gmail.com> Message-ID: I thought since 3.20 all .0 versions are marked as "release candidate" Stefanos On Fri, 16 Jan 2026 at 09:31, R?gis Haubourg wrote: > Well, my IT department updates packages in our software portal whenever > they ... want or users ask. > > Maybe we should explicitly name 4.0 "release candidate" in the package > names and our communication if 4.0 is that broken. > Regis > > > Le 16 janvier 2026 01:49:16 GMT+01:00, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC < > qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : > >> >> >> On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 19:30, Andreas Neumann >> wrote: >> > >> > Hi all, >> > >> > Regarding testing/bugfixing. >> > >> > I hope and I assume that companies and organizations wouldn't have the >> idea to base their mission critical work on a .0 release ... but rather >> wait for the next LT version or a couple of patch releases until QGIS 4.x >> can mature further. >> >> Definitely -- it's not going to be anywhere NEAR enterprise ready ?. (I >> just ran into the known issue where the qt6 builds can corrupt your user >> profiles... someone should probably look into that one sometime!) >> >> Nyall >> >> > >> > Andreas >> > >> > On 2026-01-15 08:01, Stefanos Natsis via QGIS-PSC wrote: >> > >> > I'm also +1, however I'm slightly worried that we should somehow >> compensate for the reduced testing/bugfixing time of this feature-rich >> release. >> > >> > Best >> > Stefanos >> > >> > >> > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 08:37, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer < >> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >> > >> > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 16:00, Andreas Neumann wrote: >> > > >> > > +1 - to have a voice from PSC ;-) >> > >> > Perfect, thanks Andreas! >> > >> > Nyall >> > >> > > >> > > Andreas >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 03:50, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer < >> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> On Wed, 14 Jan 2026 at 01:23, Martin Dobias >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > Hi all >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 10:21?PM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC < >> qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze >> date >> > >> >> by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > +1 from me. >> > >> >> > >> So do we consider this locked in now? Freeze moved to 27th Jan? >> > >> >> > >> Nyall >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> > >> 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 >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Andreas Neumann >> > > QGIS.ORG board member (treasurer) >> > _______________________________________________ >> > 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-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: From andreas at qgis.org Thu Jan 15 23:55:14 2026 From: andreas at qgis.org (Andreas Neumann) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 08:55:14 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? In-Reply-To: References: <95de44943cf0e9af2a871ca05b4e5f3a@carto.net> <170E1E3B-0B19-4BCA-8FB5-34F3976CA97F@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 16 Jan 2026 at 08:46, Stefanos Natsis via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > I thought since 3.20 all .0 versions are marked as "release candidate" > Yes, but the release candidate label would, under normal circumstances, be removed with the release of 4.0.1 (due on March 20). Whereas my suggestion is to keep the "release candidate" label until 4.2.1 is released (July 17). Andreas > > Stefanos > > On Fri, 16 Jan 2026 at 09:31, R?gis Haubourg > wrote: > >> Well, my IT department updates packages in our software portal whenever >> they ... want or users ask. >> >> Maybe we should explicitly name 4.0 "release candidate" in the package >> names and our communication if 4.0 is that broken. >> Regis >> >> >> Le 16 janvier 2026 01:49:16 GMT+01:00, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC < >> qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : >> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 19:30, Andreas Neumann >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hi all, >>> > >>> > Regarding testing/bugfixing. >>> > >>> > I hope and I assume that companies and organizations wouldn't have the >>> idea to base their mission critical work on a .0 release ... but rather >>> wait for the next LT version or a couple of patch releases until QGIS 4.x >>> can mature further. >>> >>> Definitely -- it's not going to be anywhere NEAR enterprise ready ?. (I >>> just ran into the known issue where the qt6 builds can corrupt your user >>> profiles... someone should probably look into that one sometime!) >>> >>> Nyall >>> >>> > >>> > Andreas >>> > >>> > On 2026-01-15 08:01, Stefanos Natsis via QGIS-PSC wrote: >>> > >>> > I'm also +1, however I'm slightly worried that we should somehow >>> compensate for the reduced testing/bugfixing time of this feature-rich >>> release. >>> > >>> > Best >>> > Stefanos >>> > >>> > >>> > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 08:37, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer < >>> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >>> > >>> > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 16:00, Andreas Neumann >>> wrote: >>> > > >>> > > +1 - to have a voice from PSC ;-) >>> > >>> > Perfect, thanks Andreas! >>> > >>> > Nyall >>> > >>> > > >>> > > Andreas >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 03:50, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer < >>> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >>> > >> >>> > >> On Wed, 14 Jan 2026 at 01:23, Martin Dobias >>> wrote: >>> > >> > >>> > >> > Hi all >>> > >> > >>> > >> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 10:21?PM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC < >>> qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze >>> date >>> > >> >> by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? >>> > >> >> >>> > >> > >>> > >> > +1 from me. >>> > >> >>> > >> So do we consider this locked in now? Freeze moved to 27th Jan? >>> > >> >>> > >> Nyall >>> > >> _______________________________________________ >>> > >> 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 >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > -- >>> > > >>> > > -- >>> > > Andreas Neumann >>> > > QGIS.ORG board member (treasurer) >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > 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-PSC mailing list >>> > QGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.org >>> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc >>> > >>> > >>> >> _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- -- Andreas Neumann QGIS.ORG board member (treasurer) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nyall.dawson at gmail.com Thu Jan 15 23:55:37 2026 From: nyall.dawson at gmail.com (Nyall Dawson) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 17:55:37 +1000 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? In-Reply-To: References: <95de44943cf0e9af2a871ca05b4e5f3a@carto.net> <170E1E3B-0B19-4BCA-8FB5-34F3976CA97F@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 16 Jan 2026, 5:46?pm Stefanos Natsis, wrote: > I thought since 3.20 all .0 versions are marked as "release candidate" > Yeah but this would be marking ALL 4.0.x releases as beta, not just 4.0.0 Nyall > Stefanos > > On Fri, 16 Jan 2026 at 09:31, R?gis Haubourg > wrote: > >> Well, my IT department updates packages in our software portal whenever >> they ... want or users ask. >> >> Maybe we should explicitly name 4.0 "release candidate" in the package >> names and our communication if 4.0 is that broken. >> Regis >> >> >> Le 16 janvier 2026 01:49:16 GMT+01:00, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC < >> qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : >> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 19:30, Andreas Neumann >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hi all, >>> > >>> > Regarding testing/bugfixing. >>> > >>> > I hope and I assume that companies and organizations wouldn't have the >>> idea to base their mission critical work on a .0 release ... but rather >>> wait for the next LT version or a couple of patch releases until QGIS 4.x >>> can mature further. >>> >>> Definitely -- it's not going to be anywhere NEAR enterprise ready ?. (I >>> just ran into the known issue where the qt6 builds can corrupt your user >>> profiles... someone should probably look into that one sometime!) >>> >>> Nyall >>> >>> > >>> > Andreas >>> > >>> > On 2026-01-15 08:01, Stefanos Natsis via QGIS-PSC wrote: >>> > >>> > I'm also +1, however I'm slightly worried that we should somehow >>> compensate for the reduced testing/bugfixing time of this feature-rich >>> release. >>> > >>> > Best >>> > Stefanos >>> > >>> > >>> > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 08:37, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer < >>> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >>> > >>> > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 16:00, Andreas Neumann >>> wrote: >>> > > >>> > > +1 - to have a voice from PSC ;-) >>> > >>> > Perfect, thanks Andreas! >>> > >>> > Nyall >>> > >>> > > >>> > > Andreas >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 03:50, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer < >>> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >>> > >> >>> > >> On Wed, 14 Jan 2026 at 01:23, Martin Dobias >>> wrote: >>> > >> > >>> > >> > Hi all >>> > >> > >>> > >> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 10:21?PM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC < >>> qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze >>> date >>> > >> >> by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? >>> > >> >> >>> > >> > >>> > >> > +1 from me. >>> > >> >>> > >> So do we consider this locked in now? Freeze moved to 27th Jan? >>> > >> >>> > >> Nyall >>> > >> _______________________________________________ >>> > >> 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 >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > -- >>> > > >>> > > -- >>> > > Andreas Neumann >>> > > QGIS.ORG board member (treasurer) >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > 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-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: From uclaros at gmail.com Fri Jan 16 02:10:31 2026 From: uclaros at gmail.com (Stefanos Natsis) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 12:10:31 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Push back feature freeze by 1/1.5 weeks? In-Reply-To: References: <95de44943cf0e9af2a871ca05b4e5f3a@carto.net> <170E1E3B-0B19-4BCA-8FB5-34F3976CA97F@gmail.com> Message-ID: Aha, thanks for clarifying that! I'd be +1 for extending the "release candidate" status to more patch releases. We could reconsider its removal before each patch release of the 4.0. cycle, though, based on the current state at the time. Stefanos On Fri, 16 Jan 2026 at 09:55, Nyall Dawson wrote: > > > On Fri, 16 Jan 2026, 5:46?pm Stefanos Natsis, wrote: > >> I thought since 3.20 all .0 versions are marked as "release candidate" >> > > Yeah but this would be marking ALL 4.0.x releases as beta, not just 4.0.0 > > Nyall > > >> Stefanos >> >> On Fri, 16 Jan 2026 at 09:31, R?gis Haubourg >> wrote: >> >>> Well, my IT department updates packages in our software portal whenever >>> they ... want or users ask. >>> >>> Maybe we should explicitly name 4.0 "release candidate" in the package >>> names and our communication if 4.0 is that broken. >>> Regis >>> >>> >>> Le 16 janvier 2026 01:49:16 GMT+01:00, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC < >>> qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 19:30, Andreas Neumann >>>> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > Hi all, >>>> > >>>> > Regarding testing/bugfixing. >>>> > >>>> > I hope and I assume that companies and organizations wouldn't have >>>> the idea to base their mission critical work on a .0 release ... but rather >>>> wait for the next LT version or a couple of patch releases until QGIS 4.x >>>> can mature further. >>>> >>>> Definitely -- it's not going to be anywhere NEAR enterprise ready ?. >>>> (I just ran into the known issue where the qt6 builds can corrupt your user >>>> profiles... someone should probably look into that one sometime!) >>>> >>>> Nyall >>>> >>>> > >>>> > Andreas >>>> > >>>> > On 2026-01-15 08:01, Stefanos Natsis via QGIS-PSC wrote: >>>> > >>>> > I'm also +1, however I'm slightly worried that we should somehow >>>> compensate for the reduced testing/bugfixing time of this feature-rich >>>> release. >>>> > >>>> > Best >>>> > Stefanos >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 08:37, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer < >>>> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 16:00, Andreas Neumann >>>> wrote: >>>> > > >>>> > > +1 - to have a voice from PSC ;-) >>>> > >>>> > Perfect, thanks Andreas! >>>> > >>>> > Nyall >>>> > >>>> > > >>>> > > Andreas >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 at 03:50, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer < >>>> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >>>> > >> >>>> > >> On Wed, 14 Jan 2026 at 01:23, Martin Dobias >>>> wrote: >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> > Hi all >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> > On Thu, Jan 8, 2026 at 10:21?PM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-PSC < >>>> qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >>>> > >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > >> >> I'm wondering if we could possibly push back the feature freeze >>>> date >>>> > >> >> by 1-1.5 weeks for this cycle? >>>> > >> >> >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> > +1 from me. >>>> > >> >>>> > >> So do we consider this locked in now? Freeze moved to 27th Jan? >>>> > >> >>>> > >> Nyall >>>> > >> _______________________________________________ >>>> > >> 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 >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > -- >>>> > > >>>> > > -- >>>> > > Andreas Neumann >>>> > > QGIS.ORG board member (treasurer) >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>> > 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-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: From manisandro at gmail.com Fri Jan 16 06:11:52 2026 From: manisandro at gmail.com (Sandro Mani) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 15:11:52 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] qgis builds from release-nightly repo not built with QGISDEBUG? Message-ID: Hi I'm trying to obtain debug output from qgis-server from the release-nighly repo (currently testing with 1:3.44.6+git20260114+3cbba756601+40noble), which according to [1] is compiled as a debug build (so as I understand should have #define QGISDEBUG?). I wrote a small plugin which does QgsMessageLog.logMessage("QGIS_DEBUG: %s" % os.environ.get('QGIS_DEBUG', ''), 'Server Plugin "DebugTest"', Qgis.Info) QgsMessageLog.logMessage("Level: %d" % QgsLogger.debugLevel(), 'Server Plugin "DebugTest"', Qgis.Info) QgsLogger.debug("This is a debug message", 0, "debug.py", "onRequestReady", 18) and then call the qgis server as QGIS_SERVER_LOG_FILE=$PWD/qgis_server.log QGIS_LOG_FILE=$PWD/qgis.log QGIS_PROJECT_FILE=$PWD/test.qgs QUERY_STRING="SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetCapabilities" /usr/lib/cgi-bin/qgis_mapserv.fcgi The relevant output is in qgis_server.log 13:52:41 INFO Server Plugin "DebugTest"[558]: QGIS_DEBUG: 13:52:41 INFO Server Plugin "DebugTest"[558]: Level: 0 while qgis.log is empty. If I manually set QGIS_DEBUG=1, qgis.log will contain debug.py:18 : (onRequestReady) [3ms] This is a debug message So it looks like the release-nighly builds are in fact not compiled with QGISDEBUG, and all QgsDebug macros [2] are compiled as stubs? Are the build logs of the release-nighly repo visible somewhere? Thanks! Sandro [1] https://qgis.org/resources/installation-guide/#debian--ubuntu [2] https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/blob/fb066c580586d9a01aeec95276a279a2adb686ad/src/core/qgslogger.h#L32 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jef at norbit.de Fri Jan 16 07:45:21 2026 From: jef at norbit.de (=?utf-8?Q?J=C3=BCrgen_E=2E?= Fischer) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 16:45:21 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] qgis builds from release-nightly repo not built with QGISDEBUG? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20260116154521.l54ewgvkijm2jvdg@norbit.de> Hi Sandro, On Fri, 16. Jan 2026 at 15:11:52 +0100, Sandro Mani via QGIS-Developer wrote: > I'm trying to obtain debug output from qgis-server from the release-nighly > repo (currently testing with 1:3.44.6+git20260114+3cbba756601+40noble), > which according to [1] is compiled as a debug build (so as I understand > should have #define QGISDEBUG?). Oh well, the master nightlies have debuggung output - the release nightlies don't (fixed [1]; not sure if that changed at some point or I just mixed up the footnotes). J?rgen > [1] https://qgis.org/resources/installation-guide/#debian--ubuntu -- J?rgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-31 Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstra?e 13 Fax. +49-4931-918175-50 Software Engineer D-26506 Norden https://www.norbit.de QGIS release manager (PSC) Germany IRC: jef on Libera|OFTC -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: From manisandro at gmail.com Fri Jan 16 08:03:42 2026 From: manisandro at gmail.com (Sandro Mani) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 17:03:42 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] qgis builds from release-nightly repo not built with QGISDEBUG? In-Reply-To: <20260116154521.l54ewgvkijm2jvdg@norbit.de> References: <20260116154521.l54ewgvkijm2jvdg@norbit.de> Message-ID: <46734f31-f979-4b89-a1c5-409904e33057@gmail.com> Hi J?rgen > On Fri, 16. Jan 2026 at 15:11:52 +0100, Sandro Mani via QGIS-Developer wrote: >> I'm trying to obtain debug output from qgis-server from the release-nighly >> repo (currently testing with 1:3.44.6+git20260114+3cbba756601+40noble), >> which according to [1] is compiled as a debug build (so as I understand >> should have #define QGISDEBUG?). > Oh well, the master nightlies have debuggung output - the release nightlies don't > (fixed [1]; not sure if that changed at some point or I just mixed up the > footnotes). Thanks for the quick reply. It would actually be useful to have stock builds close to the current release with debugging enabled. Would it be thinkable to set QGISDEBUG also for release-nightlies? Thanks Sandro From nyall.dawson at gmail.com Mon Jan 19 15:15:54 2026 From: nyall.dawson at gmail.com (Nyall Dawson) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 09:15:54 +1000 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Processing 2.x API and 4.0 regrets Message-ID: Hey list, Soo.. back when we were planning 4.0 and deciding if we would break any of the QGIS api, we made the decision that none of the existing deprecated API was particularly painful and could be dragged along with 4.x without too much effort. I've come to the realisation that there's an exception here -- the old Processing 2.x purely python based API for custom parameter GUI widgets. This is/was a pure Python API that was kept in 3.0, because at that stage we hadn't yet moved any of the Processing GUI classes to c++. When the c++ GUI classes were introduced we had to keep a lot of crufty code and Python messiness to avoid breaking this. It's been painful to drag through to 3.44, and it's going to be even more painful to maintain throughout 4.x. (Especially given the heavy churn that's currently going on in the model designer, eg https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/64591). In retrospect I think we should have made an exception to the "no PyQGIS API breakage for 4.0" rule and dropped all of that old API for 4.0. Unfortunately it's too late to do this now -- it's not as simple as just deleting a bunch of deprecated code. Rather the roots of the hackiness and old API are very deep, and there's a non-trivial amount of (complex, challenging) work associated with pulling out these roots. So -- I'd like to propose that we approach this by making it very clear in the 4.0 release notes that the old Processing 2.x API is considered completely deprecated, that it is no longer considered part of stable API, and that it WILL be removed at some stage during the lifespan of 4.x. We don't advertise a fixed schedule for this, but state that "When preparing for 4.0 support, plugin authors should port their plugins away from the deprecated Processing GUI API to ensure that they will work for all future 4.x releases". This would buy us time to do a proper considered removal of that API, while ensuring that we aren't blocked from implementing nice changes to Processing and the modeler when that API becomes impossible to work around anymore. Thoughts? Nyall -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From even.rouault at spatialys.com Mon Jan 19 15:29:42 2026 From: even.rouault at spatialys.com (Even Rouault) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 00:29:42 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Processing 2.x API and 4.0 regrets In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <31c0bb75-4bac-41c2-baf2-1e2c81418a51@spatialys.com> Nyall, I don't have particular knowledge about that bit, but your plan sounds good. Is there a way we could emit runtime deprecation warning "You are using a deprecated QGIS 2 Python API for custom parameter GUI widgets that is going to be removed in a later QGIS 4.x release. Proceed to migrating it to newer C++ based processing classes ASAP" (or something like that) that would be user visible (in log panel e.g., or maybe even a notification. Bonus point if we can mention the component/plugin that triggered the warning). Generally I think this strategy could be used in other similar instances. Gradual removal of advertized deprecated APIs rather than doing everything at once during n->n+1 upgrades might be more practical for us to do Even Le 20/01/2026 ? 00:15, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer a ?crit?: > Hey list, > > Soo.. back when we were planning 4.0 and deciding if we would break > any of the QGIS api, we made the decision that none of the existing > deprecated API was particularly painful and could be dragged along > with 4.x without too much effort. > > I've come to the realisation that there's an exception here -- the old > Processing 2.x purely python based API for custom parameter GUI > widgets. This is/was a pure Python API that was kept in 3.0, because > at that stage we hadn't yet moved any of the Processing GUI classes to > c++. When the c++ GUI classes were introduced we had to keep a lot of > crufty code and Python messiness to avoid breaking this. It's been > painful to drag through to 3.44, and it's going to be even more > painful to maintain throughout 4.x. (Especially given the heavy churn > that's currently going on in the model designer, eg > https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/64591). > > In retrospect I think we should have made an exception to the "no > PyQGIS API breakage for 4.0" rule and dropped all of that old API for > 4.0. Unfortunately it's too late to do this now -- it's not as simple > as just deleting a bunch of deprecated code. Rather the roots of the > hackiness and old API are very deep, and there's a non-trivial amount > of (complex, challenging) work associated with pulling out these roots. > > So -- I'd like to propose that we approach this by making it very > clear in the 4.0 release notes that the old Processing 2.x API is > considered completely deprecated, that it is no longer considered part > of stable API, and that it WILL be removed at some stage during the > lifespan of 4.x. We don't advertise a fixed schedule for this, but > state that "When preparing for 4.0 support, plugin authors should port > their plugins away from the deprecated Processing GUI API to ensure > that they will work for all future 4.x releases". > This would buy us time to do a proper considered removal of that API, > while ensuring that we aren't blocked from implementing nice changes > to Processing and the modeler when that API becomes impossible to work > around anymore. > Thoughts? > > Nyall > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- http://www.spatialys.com My software is free, but my time generally not. From apasotti at gmail.com Tue Jan 20 00:35:52 2026 From: apasotti at gmail.com (Alessandro Pasotti) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 09:35:52 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Processing 2.x API and 4.0 regrets In-Reply-To: <31c0bb75-4bac-41c2-baf2-1e2c81418a51@spatialys.com> References: <31c0bb75-4bac-41c2-baf2-1e2c81418a51@spatialys.com> Message-ID: I agree with Even: deprecation with a clear warning seems the best solution. On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 12:29?AM Even Rouault via QGIS-Developer wrote: > > Nyall, > > I don't have particular knowledge about that bit, but your plan sounds > good. Is there a way we could emit runtime deprecation warning "You are > using a deprecated QGIS 2 Python API for custom parameter GUI widgets > that is going to be removed in a later QGIS 4.x release. Proceed to > migrating it to newer C++ based processing classes ASAP" (or something > like that) that would be user visible (in log panel e.g., or maybe even > a notification. Bonus point if we can mention the component/plugin that > triggered the warning). Generally I think this strategy could be used in > other similar instances. Gradual removal of advertized deprecated APIs > rather than doing everything at once during n->n+1 upgrades might be > more practical for us to do > > Even > > Le 20/01/2026 ? 00:15, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer a ?crit : > > Hey list, > > > > Soo.. back when we were planning 4.0 and deciding if we would break > > any of the QGIS api, we made the decision that none of the existing > > deprecated API was particularly painful and could be dragged along > > with 4.x without too much effort. > > > > I've come to the realisation that there's an exception here -- the old > > Processing 2.x purely python based API for custom parameter GUI > > widgets. This is/was a pure Python API that was kept in 3.0, because > > at that stage we hadn't yet moved any of the Processing GUI classes to > > c++. When the c++ GUI classes were introduced we had to keep a lot of > > crufty code and Python messiness to avoid breaking this. It's been > > painful to drag through to 3.44, and it's going to be even more > > painful to maintain throughout 4.x. (Especially given the heavy churn > > that's currently going on in the model designer, eg > > https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/64591). > > > > In retrospect I think we should have made an exception to the "no > > PyQGIS API breakage for 4.0" rule and dropped all of that old API for > > 4.0. Unfortunately it's too late to do this now -- it's not as simple > > as just deleting a bunch of deprecated code. Rather the roots of the > > hackiness and old API are very deep, and there's a non-trivial amount > > of (complex, challenging) work associated with pulling out these roots. > > > > So -- I'd like to propose that we approach this by making it very > > clear in the 4.0 release notes that the old Processing 2.x API is > > considered completely deprecated, that it is no longer considered part > > of stable API, and that it WILL be removed at some stage during the > > lifespan of 4.x. We don't advertise a fixed schedule for this, but > > state that "When preparing for 4.0 support, plugin authors should port > > their plugins away from the deprecated Processing GUI API to ensure > > that they will work for all future 4.x releases". > > This would buy us time to do a proper considered removal of that API, > > while ensuring that we aren't blocked from implementing nice changes > > to Processing and the modeler when that API becomes impossible to work > > around anymore. > > Thoughts? > > > > Nyall > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > -- > http://www.spatialys.com > My software is free, but my time generally not. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- Alessandro Pasotti QCooperative: www.qcooperative.net ItOpen: www.itopen.it From alexander.bruy at gmail.com Tue Jan 20 00:53:12 2026 From: alexander.bruy at gmail.com (Alexander Bruy) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 08:53:12 +0000 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Processing 2.x API and 4.0 regrets In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: +1 to drop the old Processing 2.x API in the future 4.x release. But as mentioned by Even and Alessandro, it would be nice to make this deprecation warning clearly visible. ??, 19 ???. 2026??. ? 23:16 Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer ????: > > Hey list, > > Soo.. back when we were planning 4.0 and deciding if we would break any of the QGIS api, we made the decision that none of the existing deprecated API was particularly painful and could be dragged along with 4.x without too much effort. > > I've come to the realisation that there's an exception here -- the old Processing 2.x purely python based API for custom parameter GUI widgets. This is/was a pure Python API that was kept in 3.0, because at that stage we hadn't yet moved any of the Processing GUI classes to c++. When the c++ GUI classes were introduced we had to keep a lot of crufty code and Python messiness to avoid breaking this. It's been painful to drag through to 3.44, and it's going to be even more painful to maintain throughout 4.x. (Especially given the heavy churn that's currently going on in the model designer, eg https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/64591). > > In retrospect I think we should have made an exception to the "no PyQGIS API breakage for 4.0" rule and dropped all of that old API for 4.0. Unfortunately it's too late to do this now -- it's not as simple as just deleting a bunch of deprecated code. Rather the roots of the hackiness and old API are very deep, and there's a non-trivial amount of (complex, challenging) work associated with pulling out these roots. > > So -- I'd like to propose that we approach this by making it very clear in the 4.0 release notes that the old Processing 2.x API is considered completely deprecated, that it is no longer considered part of stable API, and that it WILL be removed at some stage during the lifespan of 4.x. We don't advertise a fixed schedule for this, but state that "When preparing for 4.0 support, plugin authors should port their plugins away from the deprecated Processing GUI API to ensure that they will work for all future 4.x releases". > > This would buy us time to do a proper considered removal of that API, while ensuring that we aren't blocked from implementing nice changes to Processing and the modeler when that API becomes impossible to work around anymore. > > Thoughts? > > Nyall > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- Alexander Bruy From loic.bartoletti at oslandia.com Tue Jan 20 01:34:30 2026 From: loic.bartoletti at oslandia.com (=?utf-8?B?TG/Dr2M=?= BARTOLETTI) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 10:34:30 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Processing 2.x API and 4.0 regrets In-Reply-To: References: <31c0bb75-4bac-41c2-baf2-1e2c81418a51@spatialys.com> Message-ID: +1 On 20/01/2026 09:35, Alessandro Pasotti via QGIS-Developer wrote: >I agree with Even: >deprecation with a clear warning seems the best solution. > >On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 12:29?AM Even Rouault via QGIS-Developer > wrote: >> >> Nyall, >> >> I don't have particular knowledge about that bit, but your plan sounds >> good. Is there a way we could emit runtime deprecation warning "You are >> using a deprecated QGIS 2 Python API for custom parameter GUI widgets >> that is going to be removed in a later QGIS 4.x release. Proceed to >> migrating it to newer C++ based processing classes ASAP" (or something >> like that) that would be user visible (in log panel e.g., or maybe even >> a notification. Bonus point if we can mention the component/plugin that >> triggered the warning). Generally I think this strategy could be used in >> other similar instances. Gradual removal of advertized deprecated APIs >> rather than doing everything at once during n->n+1 upgrades might be >> more practical for us to do >> >> Even >> >> Le 20/01/2026 ? 00:15, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer a ?crit : >> > Hey list, >> > >> > Soo.. back when we were planning 4.0 and deciding if we would break >> > any of the QGIS api, we made the decision that none of the existing >> > deprecated API was particularly painful and could be dragged along >> > with 4.x without too much effort. >> > >> > I've come to the realisation that there's an exception here -- the old >> > Processing 2.x purely python based API for custom parameter GUI >> > widgets. This is/was a pure Python API that was kept in 3.0, because >> > at that stage we hadn't yet moved any of the Processing GUI classes to >> > c++. When the c++ GUI classes were introduced we had to keep a lot of >> > crufty code and Python messiness to avoid breaking this. It's been >> > painful to drag through to 3.44, and it's going to be even more >> > painful to maintain throughout 4.x. (Especially given the heavy churn >> > that's currently going on in the model designer, eg >> > https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/64591). >> > >> > In retrospect I think we should have made an exception to the "no >> > PyQGIS API breakage for 4.0" rule and dropped all of that old API for >> > 4.0. Unfortunately it's too late to do this now -- it's not as simple >> > as just deleting a bunch of deprecated code. Rather the roots of the >> > hackiness and old API are very deep, and there's a non-trivial amount >> > of (complex, challenging) work associated with pulling out these roots. >> > >> > So -- I'd like to propose that we approach this by making it very >> > clear in the 4.0 release notes that the old Processing 2.x API is >> > considered completely deprecated, that it is no longer considered part >> > of stable API, and that it WILL be removed at some stage during the >> > lifespan of 4.x. We don't advertise a fixed schedule for this, but >> > state that "When preparing for 4.0 support, plugin authors should port >> > their plugins away from the deprecated Processing GUI API to ensure >> > that they will work for all future 4.x releases". >> > This would buy us time to do a proper considered removal of that API, >> > while ensuring that we aren't blocked from implementing nice changes >> > to Processing and the modeler when that API becomes impossible to work >> > around anymore. >> > Thoughts? >> > >> > Nyall >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > 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 >> >> -- >> http://www.spatialys.com >> My software is free, but my time generally not. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > > >-- >Alessandro Pasotti >QCooperative: www.qcooperative.net >ItOpen: www.itopen.it >_______________________________________________ >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 From matthias at opengis.ch Tue Jan 20 05:04:20 2026 From: matthias at opengis.ch (Matthias Kuhn) Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 14:04:20 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Processing 2.x API and 4.0 regrets In-Reply-To: References: <31c0bb75-4bac-41c2-baf2-1e2c81418a51@spatialys.com> Message-ID: Also +1 for deprecation plus removal during the lifecycle of QGIS 4. I'd also be in favor of embracing this approach more widely, like Even proposed. I'd like to have the possibility to make deprecation user visible warnings in prod installations (typical desktop, server installations) and have it raise an exception when run in a typical test/ci environment. Matthias On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 10:34?AM Lo?c BARTOLETTI via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > +1 > > On 20/01/2026 09:35, Alessandro Pasotti via QGIS-Developer wrote: > >I agree with Even: > >deprecation with a clear warning seems the best solution. > > > >On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 12:29?AM Even Rouault via QGIS-Developer > > wrote: > >> > >> Nyall, > >> > >> I don't have particular knowledge about that bit, but your plan sounds > >> good. Is there a way we could emit runtime deprecation warning "You are > >> using a deprecated QGIS 2 Python API for custom parameter GUI widgets > >> that is going to be removed in a later QGIS 4.x release. Proceed to > >> migrating it to newer C++ based processing classes ASAP" (or something > >> like that) that would be user visible (in log panel e.g., or maybe even > >> a notification. Bonus point if we can mention the component/plugin that > >> triggered the warning). Generally I think this strategy could be used in > >> other similar instances. Gradual removal of advertized deprecated APIs > >> rather than doing everything at once during n->n+1 upgrades might be > >> more practical for us to do > >> > >> Even > >> > >> Le 20/01/2026 ? 00:15, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer a ?crit : > >> > Hey list, > >> > > >> > Soo.. back when we were planning 4.0 and deciding if we would break > >> > any of the QGIS api, we made the decision that none of the existing > >> > deprecated API was particularly painful and could be dragged along > >> > with 4.x without too much effort. > >> > > >> > I've come to the realisation that there's an exception here -- the old > >> > Processing 2.x purely python based API for custom parameter GUI > >> > widgets. This is/was a pure Python API that was kept in 3.0, because > >> > at that stage we hadn't yet moved any of the Processing GUI classes to > >> > c++. When the c++ GUI classes were introduced we had to keep a lot of > >> > crufty code and Python messiness to avoid breaking this. It's been > >> > painful to drag through to 3.44, and it's going to be even more > >> > painful to maintain throughout 4.x. (Especially given the heavy churn > >> > that's currently going on in the model designer, eg > >> > https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/64591). > >> > > >> > In retrospect I think we should have made an exception to the "no > >> > PyQGIS API breakage for 4.0" rule and dropped all of that old API for > >> > 4.0. Unfortunately it's too late to do this now -- it's not as simple > >> > as just deleting a bunch of deprecated code. Rather the roots of the > >> > hackiness and old API are very deep, and there's a non-trivial amount > >> > of (complex, challenging) work associated with pulling out these > roots. > >> > > >> > So -- I'd like to propose that we approach this by making it very > >> > clear in the 4.0 release notes that the old Processing 2.x API is > >> > considered completely deprecated, that it is no longer considered part > >> > of stable API, and that it WILL be removed at some stage during the > >> > lifespan of 4.x. We don't advertise a fixed schedule for this, but > >> > state that "When preparing for 4.0 support, plugin authors should port > >> > their plugins away from the deprecated Processing GUI API to ensure > >> > that they will work for all future 4.x releases". > >> > This would buy us time to do a proper considered removal of that API, > >> > while ensuring that we aren't blocked from implementing nice changes > >> > to Processing and the modeler when that API becomes impossible to work > >> > around anymore. > >> > Thoughts? > >> > > >> > Nyall > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > 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 > >> > >> -- > >> http://www.spatialys.com > >> My software is free, but my time generally not. > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > > > > > > >-- > >Alessandro Pasotti > >QCooperative: www.qcooperative.net > >ItOpen: www.itopen.it > >_______________________________________________ > >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: