From tim at kartoza.com Tue Sep 1 04:02:56 2026 From: tim at kartoza.com (Tim Sutton) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 12:02:56 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Rating abuse issue on the QGIS Plugins Website In-Reply-To: References: <4d70c538-b1b5-4c82-8172-9e87cd3fbcf9@gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi all Thank you very much for all the feedback and comments. I had a chat through this with Lova offline in one of our catch up calls and I am of the opinion that we should just remove the feature entirely - both in QGIS desktop and on the plugins.qgis.org web site. We are a small team and not equipped to deal with queries and validation and reviewing inputs etc. that comes with implementing a more robust system. So if there are no objections we will implement a noop on the api call (so it doesn't break legacy QGIS installs) and then Lova and I will make a patch to QGIS core for you guys to review and hopefully approve if we did a good job of stripping it out. Regards Tim On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 5:06?PM Valentin Buira via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > Hi Lova, > > > I agree that shifting to authenticated ratings with a proper comment > system makes the most sense given the current situation. > > Thanks a lot for suggesting this, I had one bad review without explanation > on one of my plugins, and it still haunts me to this day! > > If you're looking to draw some inspiration, I think over the years Steam > really nailed the rating system in their game store. > > * They display two ratings, one rating average from recent reviews, and > one rating average for the overall reviews on the lifetime of the game. > * There is a bar chart with positive/negative rating along the year, so > you can see the evolution and "review bombing" [0] > * The review include info like hardware of the users, game version -> this > could be simplified to QGIS Version and Plugin version, and maybe OS > * Reviews always have comments > * You can filter reviews by your language, date, rating, positive/negative > etc... > > Of course we don't have to have as compelling a rating system (And we > probably should not, we are not in the plugin selling nor video game > selling business after all). But I think it's interesting to look at it > anyway > > Cheers, > Valentin > > [0] one good example of this is "no man's sky" than went from most > negative to mostly positive alongs the updates > https://store.steampowered.com/app/275850/No_Mans_Sky/#app_reviews_hash > > Le mer. 19 ao?t 2026 ? 11:57, Lova Andriarimalala via QGIS-Developer < > qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : > >> Hi R?gis and Denis >> >> Thank you for the input. I agree that shifting to authenticated ratings >> with a proper comment system makes the most sense given the current >> situation. >> >> With that change, I wonder if it wouldn't be simpler to start with clean >> rating records for all plugins rather than migrating those who rated with >> an account from the current obsolete ones. This will prevent recalculating >> all ratings based on the new rule or considering removing any rating based >> on abuse (which is difficult to determine) if we even choose to keep the >> obsolete records. With clean records, we could easily add the >> mandatory constructive comments feature as Denis suggested. >> >> On the QGIS Desktop side, this change will most likely require a QEP >> first because the existing feature in current and previous versions will >> break and I am not familiar with how to handle that. >> >> I can also prepare a detailed plan for the changes and announcement >> accordingly. >> >> Best regards, >> Lova Andriarimalala >> >> >> *QGIS Full Stack Developer * >> *T *: +27(0) 87 809 2702 <+27%2087%20809%202702> *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.* >> >> >> On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 at 10:43, R?gis Haubourg >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, and thanks for the very clear situation overview Lova! >>> >>> Firefox requires to log to be able to rate. I concur with Denis. >>> Anonymous voting is now obsolete to me, as the ecosystem has grown and many >>> companies rely on this ecosystem. >>> >>> I would have no problem with a communication campaign announcing that >>> rating is no more authorized for anonymous accounts, and should only be >>> done from the website, as I don't think we want to add a sign in feature >>> from QGIS desktop itself. This feature would open the gate to a bunch of >>> security / privacy /compliance issues that I don't thing we want to add >>> complexity right now, as this is one strength of QGIS, to have no link with >>> our public infrastructure and no personal data collection. >>> >>> So, I guess that would mean that we remove the rating feature from QGIS >>> desktop and that the voting button only opens the web app at the right >>> place. >>> >>> >>> Best regards >>> >>> R?gis >>> >>> >>> >>> On 19/08/2026 09:16, Denis Rouzaud via QGIS-Developer wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> We switch to osgeo logged-in users only and force to have a >>> (constructive) comment? >>> Otherwise votes are meaningless and useless I'd say. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Denis >>> >>> Le mer. 19 ao?t 2026 ? 09:07, Lova Andriarimalala via QGIS-Developer < >>> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : >>> >>>> Hello everyone, >>>> >>>> Following the plugin rating abuse issue reported at >>>> https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Plugins-Website/issues/416 and >>>> https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Plugins-Website/issues/420, I wonder if >>>> someone could help or share some thoughts about it. >>>> >>>> We have released some fixes to enforce throttles ( >>>> https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Plugins-Website/pull/418), reject forged >>>> cookies and add a cap votes per address ( >>>> https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Plugins-Website/pull/423). However, it is >>>> not fully working because every IP recorded against a vote is a Cloudflare >>>> edge IP, not a real user IP. I checked 100 recent votes against >>>> Cloudflare's published ranges: 100 out of 100 match. So the per-IP cap is >>>> counting Cloudflare's proxy pool, which rotates per request. So, storing >>>> real client IPs would probably require some discussions regarding GDPR and >>>> retention angle. >>>> >>>> The reporter also asks us to (a) purge the fake votes and recompute the >>>> affected plugin scores, and (b) require a logged-in account to vote. Both >>>> are policy calls, not just code. And noting that the latter will probably >>>> break how the QGIS Desktop plugin manager submits ratings anonymously over >>>> XML-RPC. >>>> >>>> Thanks so much in advance for any input. >>>> >>>> Lova Andriarimalala >>>> >>>> >>>> *QGIS Full Stack Developer * >>>> *T *: +27(0) 87 809 2702 *E *: lova at kartoza.com *W* >>>> : kartoza.com >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 listQGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org >>> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> QGIS-Developer mailing list >> QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org >> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >> > _______________________________________________ > QGIS-Developer mailing list > QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > -- Tim Sutton *Kartoza Cofounder*Tim is a member of the QGIS Project Steering Committee *E *: tim 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 Tue Sep 1 05:30:46 2026 From: denis.rouzaud at gmail.com (Denis Rouzaud) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 14:30:46 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Status of 3.44 becoming LTR? In-Reply-To: <20251104175111.2ieagxyfxlnxghhd@norbit.de> References: <20251104175111.2ieagxyfxlnxghhd@norbit.de> Message-ID: Hi, It looks like there is an agreement of having 4.4.x as the next LTR. If so, can we adapt the roadmap https://qgis.org/resources/roadmap/ So we can communicate (since LTR is supposed to happen in 3 weeks!) Cheers, Denis Le mar. 4 nov. 2025 ? 18:51, J?rgen E. Fischer via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : > Hi Greg, > > On Tue, 04. Nov 2025 at 08:59:06 -0500, Greg Troxel via QGIS-Developer > wrote: > > Yes, that makes sense and I understood the general plan. What I was not > > clear about was whether, today, 3.44 *was* the LTR or just *is going to > > be*. But from reading the roadmap, I convinced myself that today, 3.40 > > is LTR, and in late February, 3.44 will become LTR. Confusingly, 3.44 > > proclaims itself LTR in the splash screen, and it sort of is, kind of > > like crown prince. > > Well, in my view the ltr is a branch that is longer maintained as others. > So > an ltr starts when it's branched off. > > We just build packages for the latest and long-term release and as that > wouldn't make much sense while both are the same, we continue to build the > previous ltr, while the new ltr is also the latest release. > > That way we still have two lines to build and the new ltr has some more > time to > replace the previous. That happens when the next version is released and > takes > its place as lastest release. > > That should also be the point were the splash is changed - which is usually > with .4. That would have been - but should have happend with .8 on this > branch. The splash change was meanwhile reverted. But I didn't bother to > retag or do another point release just for this IMHO minor issue - the > branch > is a LTR branch. > > > J?rgen > > -- > J?rgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-31 > Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rhe > instra?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 > _______________________________________________ > 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 jef at norbit.de Tue Sep 1 05:38:51 2026 From: jef at norbit.de (=?utf-8?Q?J=C3=BCrgen_E=2E?= Fischer) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 14:38:51 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Next 4.x LTR In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20260901123851.lzivav7i4m65b7ia@norbit.de> Hi, On Tue, 25. Aug 2026 at 10:26:09 +1000, Nyall Dawson wrote: > On Mon, 24. Aug 2026 at 15:14:57 +0200, J?rgen E. Fischer wrote: > > On Fri, 21. Aug 2026 at 11:54:28 +1000, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer wrote: > > > I don't think we're there yet for 4.2. 3.44 is a VERY solid release, > > > and I think we'd be doing our enterprise users a disservice by > > > officially promoting the idea that 4.4 is just as stable. > > > > So your suggestion is to removed the ltr-4_2 tag and continue 3.44 as LTR for > > the forseeable future until there is a 4.x release that is close to the > > stability of 3.44? > > That's my feeling. > (I mean -- try opening a layout, selecting two items, and group ... > *CRASH*. This is the kind of fundamental issue I'm referring to when I > say 4.2 isn't a match for 3.44 for stability). On Tue, 01. Sep 2026 at 14:30:46 +0200, Denis Rouzaud wrote: > It looks like there is an agreement of having 4.4.x as the next LTR. > If so, can we adapt the roadmap https://qgis.org/resources/roadmap/ > So we can communicate (since LTR is supposed to happen in 3 weeks!) It's not what Nyall suggested. J?rgen -- 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 Matrix: @jef:osgeo.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: From denis.rouzaud at gmail.com Tue Sep 1 05:44:44 2026 From: denis.rouzaud at gmail.com (Denis Rouzaud) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 14:44:44 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Next 4.x LTR In-Reply-To: <20260901123851.lzivav7i4m65b7ia@norbit.de> References: <20260901123851.lzivav7i4m65b7ia@norbit.de> Message-ID: Indeed, I misread Nyall's email. My personal take here would be that we extend the next feature freeze to the required period to get the stability required instead of adding new features. But in any case, the roadmap needs to be updated as soon as possible as it still presents 4.2 as next LTR. Le mar. 1 sept. 2026 ? 14:39, J?rgen E. Fischer via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : > Hi, > > On Tue, 25. Aug 2026 at 10:26:09 +1000, Nyall Dawson wrote: > > On Mon, 24. Aug 2026 at 15:14:57 +0200, J?rgen E. Fischer wrote: > > > On Fri, 21. Aug 2026 at 11:54:28 +1000, Nyall Dawson via > QGIS-Developer wrote: > > > > I don't think we're there yet for 4.2. 3.44 is a VERY solid release, > > > > and I think we'd be doing our enterprise users a disservice by > > > > officially promoting the idea that 4.4 is just as stable. > > > > > > So your suggestion is to removed the ltr-4_2 tag and continue 3.44 as > LTR for > > > the forseeable future until there is a 4.x release that is close to the > > > stability of 3.44? > > > > That's my feeling. > > > (I mean -- try opening a layout, selecting two items, and group ... > > *CRASH*. This is the kind of fundamental issue I'm referring to when I > > say 4.2 isn't a match for 3.44 for stability). > > On Tue, 01. Sep 2026 at 14:30:46 +0200, Denis Rouzaud wrote: > > It looks like there is an agreement of having 4.4.x as the next LTR. > > If so, can we adapt the roadmap https://qgis.org/resources/roadmap/ > > So we can communicate (since LTR is supposed to happen in 3 weeks!) > > It's not what Nyall suggested. > > > J?rgen > > -- > 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 Matrix: @jef: > osgeo.org > _______________________________________________ > 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 uclaros at gmail.com Tue Sep 1 06:05:22 2026 From: uclaros at gmail.com (Stefanos Natsis) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 16:05:22 +0300 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Next 4.x LTR In-Reply-To: References: <20260901123851.lzivav7i4m65b7ia@norbit.de> Message-ID: We could still have 4.2 as LTR, just aim for a (much) later release, like 4.2.8 or even later During these 6 (or more) months we can promote fixing 4.0/4.2 bugs/regressions instead of (or in addition to) the paid bugfixing rounds. As usual, big part of the problem are the unreported bugs though... Best, Stefanos On Tue, 1 Sept 2026 at 15:45, Denis Rouzaud via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > Indeed, I misread Nyall's email. My personal take here would be that we > extend the next feature freeze to the required period to get the stability > required instead of adding new features. > > But in any case, the roadmap needs to be updated as soon as possible as it > still presents 4.2 as next LTR. > > Le mar. 1 sept. 2026 ? 14:39, J?rgen E. Fischer via QGIS-Developer < > qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : > >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, 25. Aug 2026 at 10:26:09 +1000, Nyall Dawson wrote: >> > On Mon, 24. Aug 2026 at 15:14:57 +0200, J?rgen E. Fischer wrote: >> > > On Fri, 21. Aug 2026 at 11:54:28 +1000, Nyall Dawson via >> QGIS-Developer wrote: >> > > > I don't think we're there yet for 4.2. 3.44 is a VERY solid release, >> > > > and I think we'd be doing our enterprise users a disservice by >> > > > officially promoting the idea that 4.4 is just as stable. >> > > >> > > So your suggestion is to removed the ltr-4_2 tag and continue 3.44 as >> LTR for >> > > the forseeable future until there is a 4.x release that is close to >> the >> > > stability of 3.44? >> > >> > That's my feeling. >> >> > (I mean -- try opening a layout, selecting two items, and group ... >> > *CRASH*. This is the kind of fundamental issue I'm referring to when I >> > say 4.2 isn't a match for 3.44 for stability). >> >> On Tue, 01. Sep 2026 at 14:30:46 +0200, Denis Rouzaud wrote: >> > It looks like there is an agreement of having 4.4.x as the next LTR. >> > If so, can we adapt the roadmap https://qgis.org/resources/roadmap/ >> > So we can communicate (since LTR is supposed to happen in 3 weeks!) >> >> It's not what Nyall suggested. >> >> >> J?rgen >> >> -- >> 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 Matrix: @jef: >> osgeo.org >> _______________________________________________ >> 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: From jean.felder at oslandia.com Tue Sep 1 07:19:07 2026 From: jean.felder at oslandia.com (Jean Felder) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 16:19:07 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Next 4.x LTR In-Reply-To: References: <20260901123851.lzivav7i4m65b7ia@norbit.de> Message-ID: <5aae73da-4c02-4803-b3ca-612ad150202c@oslandia.com> Hi, I don't have strong feelings about which version should the next LTR. However, I think it would be important to have a clear overview of the current blockers before making an informed decision. Would it be possible to track all the blockers as github issues? We could also add an "LTR blocker" label to make them easier to identify and follow. I'm happy to help move this forward. However, I'm not sure what the current blockers are, or whether some of them have already been reported. Thanks, Jean Le 01/09/2026 ? 15:05, Stefanos Natsis via QGIS-Developer a ?crit?: > We could still have 4.2 as LTR, just aim for a (much) later release, > like 4.2.8 or even later > During these 6 (or more) months we can promote fixing 4.0/4.2 > bugs/regressions instead of (or in addition to) the paid bugfixing rounds. > As usual, big part of the problem are the unreported bugs though... > > Best, > Stefanos > > On Tue, 1 Sept 2026 at 15:45, Denis Rouzaud via QGIS-Developer > wrote: > > Indeed, I misread?Nyall's email. My personal take here would be > that we extend the next feature freeze to the required period to > get the stability required instead of adding new features. > > But in any case, the roadmap needs to be updated as?soon as > possible as it still presents 4.2 as next LTR. > > Le?mar. 1 sept. 2026 ??14:39, J?rgen E. Fischer via QGIS-Developer > a ?crit?: > > Hi, > > On Tue, 25. Aug 2026 at 10:26:09 +1000, Nyall Dawson wrote: > > On Mon, 24. Aug 2026 at 15:14:57 +0200, J?rgen E. Fischer wrote: > > > On Fri, 21. Aug 2026 at 11:54:28 +1000, Nyall Dawson via > QGIS-Developer wrote: > > > > I don't think we're there yet for 4.2. 3.44 is a VERY > solid release, > > > > and I think we'd be doing our enterprise users a > disservice by > > > > officially promoting the idea that 4.4 is just as stable. > > > > > > So your suggestion is to removed the ltr-4_2 tag and > continue 3.44 as LTR for > > > the forseeable future until there is a 4.x release that is > close to the > > > stability of 3.44? > > > > That's my feeling. > > > (I mean -- try opening a layout, selecting two items, and > group ... > > *CRASH*. This is the kind of fundamental issue I'm referring > to when I > > say 4.2 isn't a match for 3.44 for stability). > > On Tue, 01. Sep 2026 at 14:30:46 +0200, Denis Rouzaud wrote: > > It looks like there is an agreement of having 4.4.x as the > next LTR. > > If so, can we adapt the roadmap > https://qgis.org/resources/roadmap/ > > So we can communicate (since LTR is supposed to happen in 3 > weeks!) > > It's not what Nyall suggested. > > > J?rgen > > -- > 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 Matrix: @jef:osgeo.org > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- Jean Felder Ing?nieur SIG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From david at opengis.ch Wed Sep 2 12:28:31 2026 From: david at opengis.ch (David Signer) Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2026 21:28:31 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [Qgis-psc] Next 4.x LTR In-Reply-To: References: <20260901123851.lzivav7i4m65b7ia@norbit.de> Message-ID: I really like this suggestion. This would let users test version 4.2 early and they could keep their own roadmap. They can even go live with it already and get updates for a long time. And we can still call the LTR stable when it is ready. On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 3:05?PM Stefanos Natsis via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > We could still have 4.2 as LTR, just aim for a (much) later release, like > 4.2.8 or even later > During these 6 (or more) months we can promote fixing 4.0/4.2 > bugs/regressions instead of (or in addition to) the paid bugfixing rounds. > As usual, big part of the problem are the unreported bugs though... > > Best, > Stefanos > > On Tue, 1 Sept 2026 at 15:45, Denis Rouzaud via QGIS-Developer < > qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > >> Indeed, I misread Nyall's email. My personal take here would be that we >> extend the next feature freeze to the required period to get the stability >> required instead of adding new features. >> >> But in any case, the roadmap needs to be updated as soon as possible as >> it still presents 4.2 as next LTR. >> >> Le mar. 1 sept. 2026 ? 14:39, J?rgen E. Fischer via QGIS-Developer < >> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Tue, 25. Aug 2026 at 10:26:09 +1000, Nyall Dawson wrote: >>> > On Mon, 24. Aug 2026 at 15:14:57 +0200, J?rgen E. Fischer wrote: >>> > > On Fri, 21. Aug 2026 at 11:54:28 +1000, Nyall Dawson via >>> QGIS-Developer wrote: >>> > > > I don't think we're there yet for 4.2. 3.44 is a VERY solid >>> release, >>> > > > and I think we'd be doing our enterprise users a disservice by >>> > > > officially promoting the idea that 4.4 is just as stable. >>> > > >>> > > So your suggestion is to removed the ltr-4_2 tag and continue 3.44 >>> as LTR for >>> > > the forseeable future until there is a 4.x release that is close to >>> the >>> > > stability of 3.44? >>> > >>> > That's my feeling. >>> >>> > (I mean -- try opening a layout, selecting two items, and group ... >>> > *CRASH*. This is the kind of fundamental issue I'm referring to when I >>> > say 4.2 isn't a match for 3.44 for stability). >>> >>> On Tue, 01. Sep 2026 at 14:30:46 +0200, Denis Rouzaud wrote: >>> > It looks like there is an agreement of having 4.4.x as the next LTR. >>> > If so, can we adapt the roadmap https://qgis.org/resources/roadmap/ >>> > So we can communicate (since LTR is supposed to happen in 3 weeks!) >>> >>> It's not what Nyall suggested. >>> >>> >>> J?rgen >>> >>> -- >>> 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 Matrix: @jef: >>> osgeo.org >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> > _______________________________________________ > 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 administration at qgis.org Wed Sep 2 13:06:11 2026 From: administration at qgis.org (Marco Serusi) Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2026 22:06:11 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS Contributor Survey Reminder Message-ID: Hello everyone, This is just a friendly reminder that this year?s QGIS Contributor Survey will close on September 30th. If you have doubts, you can reach out to administration at qgis.org or email the PSC at psc at qgis.org Thank you for your help, -- *Marco Serusi* *Administrative Assistant - QGIS* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From axel.n.c.andersson at gmail.com Thu Sep 3 04:22:11 2026 From: axel.n.c.andersson at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Axel_H=C3=B6rteborn?=) Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 13:22:11 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Request for Trusted Plugin Author Status Message-ID: Dear QGIS Developers, In accordance with https://plugins.qgis.org/docs/approval I would like to request consideration for Trusted Plugin Author status. I have been maintaining the *GeoDataFarm* plugin since 2018 and have recently also become the maintainer of *OMRAT*. Over the years I have actively maintained GeoDataFarm, provided updates, fixed issues, and supported users. With the addition of OMRAT, I am now responsible for maintaining multiple QGIS plugins and plan to continue supporting them over the long term. Based on the criteria described in the QGIS plugin approval process, I hope my track record as a plugin maintainer can be considered sufficient for Trusted Author status. Plugin pages: - GeoDataFarm: https://plugins.qgis.org/plugins/geodatafarm/ - OMRAT: https://plugins.qgis.org/plugins/Omrat/ Thank you for your consideration. Please let me know if any additional information is needed. Best regards, *Axel H?rteborn*Maintainer of GeoDataFarm and OMRAT -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lova at kartoza.com Thu Sep 3 05:17:23 2026 From: lova at kartoza.com (Lova Andriarimalala) Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 15:17:23 +0300 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Request for Trusted Plugin Author Status In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Axel, Thank you for your email. Tim and I were discussing the proper way to allow plugins authors to request this status, along with the necessary criteria. Currently, there's no criteria we could use to evaluate plugin authors and grant this access. I will start building a plan and drafts for that, and we will probably communicate once the process is approved and implemented. Thank you for your patience and understanding. 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.* On Thu, 3 Sept 2026 at 14:22, Axel H?rteborn via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > Dear QGIS Developers, > > In accordance with https://plugins.qgis.org/docs/approval I would like to > request consideration for Trusted Plugin Author status. > > I have been maintaining the *GeoDataFarm* plugin since 2018 and have > recently also become the maintainer of *OMRAT*. Over the years I have > actively maintained GeoDataFarm, provided updates, fixed issues, and > supported users. With the addition of OMRAT, I am now responsible for > maintaining multiple QGIS plugins and plan to continue supporting them over > the long term. > > Based on the criteria described in the QGIS plugin approval process, I > hope my track record as a plugin maintainer can be considered sufficient > for Trusted Author status. > > Plugin pages: > > - GeoDataFarm: https://plugins.qgis.org/plugins/geodatafarm/ > - OMRAT: https://plugins.qgis.org/plugins/Omrat/ > > Thank you for your consideration. Please let me know if any additional > information is needed. > > Best regards, > > *Axel H?rteborn*Maintainer of GeoDataFarm and OMRAT > _______________________________________________ > 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 lova at kartoza.com Fri Sep 4 07:00:00 2026 From: lova at kartoza.com (Lova Andriarimalala) Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2026 17:00:00 +0300 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS Full Stack Developer Report for August 2026 Message-ID: Hello everyone, Please find some highlights regarding the development and maintenance of the QGIS Websites for the past month, from August 3rd to August 31st, 2026. *QGIS.org:* - Add explicit explanation for binary availability in roadmap [New PR] - Fix filtering in individual contributors list [Merged] - fix(hub): sync docs language list with QGIS-Documentation [Merged] *QGIS Plugins:* - Enhance URL validation with timeout and user-agent headers [Merged] - Bump version to 4.2.1 and update tests to mock URL validation [Merged] - Fix typo in "Informational security items" across multiple templates [Merged] - Prevent package_name PEP compliance check for new version from main upload [Merged] - Update plugin approval messages to clarify validation timeline and volunteer availability [Merged] - Refactor URL validation [Merged] - Add throttle to plugins vote [Merged] - fix(plugins): parameterise the raw SQL behind the plugin XML feeds [Merged] - Security/secret key and basic auth [Merged] - fix(plugins): reject forged vote cookies and cap votes per address [Merged] - Upgrade Django and other dependencies [Merged] - Upgrade frontend deps [Merged] - Upgrade docker images and dependencies [Merged] - Improve release report accuracy [Merged] - Multi stage docker image [Merged] *QGIS Certification:* - Block deletion of courses/course types that contains valid certificates [Merged] - Make deletion bottom-up [Merged] - Fix some views permissions and issues [Merged] *QGIS Infrastructure:* - We are currently preparing the QGIS Feed Website for a migration to the new infrastructure and working on implementing SSO authentication. 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 benoit.de.mezzo at oslandia.com Fri Sep 4 07:29:23 2026 From: benoit.de.mezzo at oslandia.com (Benoit D.-M.) Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2026 16:29:23 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Add cpp plugin API for 3D view Message-ID: <2366de83-ade2-4fbf-96f3-c608d07f8bf7@oslandia.com> Hello everyone, as you maybe know, we (Oslandia) are working on several 3D functionalities for our customers, that we aim to add to QGIS core. Among them are 3D editing capabilities. Nevertheless, the specific QEP discussion [1] about editing, points toward a broad technical redesign that is out of scope for our current project, this is why we propose to ship the features within a QGIS C++ plugin to gather users feedback and contribute to the discussion on the 3D UI. In order to achieve this we propose adding accessors to the 3D view that enable the creation of an external QGIS plugin in C++, incorporating the relevant features. These new API accessors will be considered unstable API and not exposed in Python. The changes are developed in the following PR: https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/67298 Do you see any drawbacks to these changes? Here are our main reasons why to carry out this development as a C++ plugin rather than a Python plugin: * the functions required for 3D interaction are currently not exposed in the Python API, and the changes needed for the Python binding represent a significant amount of work that is difficult to estimate * C++ plugins, even though their development is not encouraged, are still active * the features we want to test already partially exist as a C++ prototype We are conscious that there are two major potential improvements for the 3D view that would upgrade it to a similar level as other parts of QGIS (graphical modeler, reports, etc.): * make the 3D view window a real QWindow allowing for menus, proper toolbars, panels etc. * implement Python bindings As they are largely exceeding the scope of our current project, we suggest that these improvements are targeted within the grant proposal program of 2027. We?d be happy to contribute development-wise but would be likewise happy to see it implemented by someone else. Thank you in advance for your input. Best, [1] https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals/pull/367/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nyall.dawson at gmail.com Fri Sep 4 16:17:42 2026 From: nyall.dawson at gmail.com (Nyall Dawson) Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2026 09:17:42 +1000 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Add cpp plugin API for 3D view In-Reply-To: <2366de83-ade2-4fbf-96f3-c608d07f8bf7@oslandia.com> References: <2366de83-ade2-4fbf-96f3-c608d07f8bf7@oslandia.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 5 Sept 2026 at 00:29, Benoit D.-M. via QGIS-Developer wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > as you maybe know, we (Oslandia) are working on several 3D functionalities for our customers, that we aim to add to QGIS core. Among them are 3D editing capabilities. > > Nevertheless, the specific QEP discussion [1] about editing, points toward a broad technical redesign that is out of scope for our current project, this is why we propose to ship the features within a QGIS C++ plugin to gather users feedback and contribute to the discussion on the 3D UI. > > In order to achieve this we propose adding accessors to the 3D view that enable the creation of an external QGIS plugin in C++, incorporating the relevant features. These new API accessors will be considered unstable API and not exposed in Python. > The changes are developed in the following PR: https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/67298 > > Do you see any drawbacks to these changes? > I'm not a -1, but my concern would be that we don't have any formal policies for non-Python API. It's easy right now to determine if you've broken the rules by just checking the changes to the sip bindings and evaluating if they'd have broken any Python scripts. If we introduce API that's solely for c++ plugins, how we will handle the stable API? I can definitely see someone seeing all the unused lines of code in future and (rightly!) killing them all. And if you scatter "please do not remove" comments throughout the code, those will remain forever and become a permanent road block to development, even if the c++ plugin is dead or no longer uses that API. My gut feeling is that you should do this via the existing way, by developing APIs that are sufficiently well designed to be eligible to become part of the (python) GUI stable API. If you're dead-set on the c++ plugin API approach, then a QEP formalising some policies for this is needed first. Nyall From muhammadparif270405 at gmail.com Mon Sep 7 18:27:49 2026 From: muhammadparif270405 at gmail.com (Muhammad Parif) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 08:27:49 +0700 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Request for Plugin Review and Publication - Multicollinearity Test and Importance Value Index Message-ID: Dear QGIS Plugin Repository Team, My name is Muhammad Parif, the developer of the Multicollinearity Test and Importance Value Index plugin that was recently uploaded to the QGIS repository. I am writing to kindly request a review of this plugin so it can be published and made available to the public. I have been receiving numerous requests from colleagues and users who are eagerly waiting to use this tool for their data analysis workflows within QGIS. Having it officially available in the repository would greatly assist them in their work. If there are any code adjustments, documentation updates, or standard requirements that I need to fulfill before approval, please let me know. I am fully committed to making the necessary improvements promptly. Thank you very much for your time, hard work, and dedication to the QGIS community. I look forward to hearing from you. Best regards, Muhammad Parif -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lars.nielsen at lifadigital.dk Mon Sep 7 23:51:47 2026 From: lars.nielsen at lifadigital.dk (Lars I. Nielsen) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 06:51:47 +0000 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] How to transfer published plugins to another account ? Message-ID: Hi all. I need to transfer a handful of recently published plugins to another user account. The old account was created years ago, but my division became a separate company last year, and so we have new emails and everything. Luckily I still have temporary access to the old email accounts, but that stops at some point. When publishing the plugins recently, I just reused the old account without considering the implications. I thought I could just update the account details. But it seems I can't, and I'm stuck. So I need to transfer the plugins to a new account. How do I go about this ? Best Regards / Med venlig hilsen Lars I. Nielsen Senior GIS Developer, FME and Python Certified Professional Hovednr: +45 6443 1200 Direkte: +45 6313 6849 Mail: lars.nielsen at lifadigital.dk [cid:image001.png at 01DD3F6D.D41935B0] LIFA Digital ApS / +45 6313 6800 / lifadigital.dk / CVR. 45285022 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 1551 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: From lova at kartoza.com Tue Sep 8 01:12:17 2026 From: lova at kartoza.com (Lova Andriarimalala) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 11:12:17 +0300 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Request for Plugin Review and Publication - Multicollinearity Test and Importance Value Index In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Muhammad, Thank you for reaching out. Your plugin is currently awaiting review, as mentioned in the docs at https://plugins.qgis.org/docs/approval: "*The approval of plugins is primarily carried out by volunteers. This could take from couple of minutes to days depending on their availability*". Thank you for your patience. 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.* On Tue, 8 Sept 2026 at 04:28, Muhammad Parif via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > Dear QGIS Plugin Repository Team, > > > My name is Muhammad Parif, the developer of the Multicollinearity Test and > Importance Value Index plugin that was recently uploaded to the QGIS > repository. > > I am writing to kindly request a review of this plugin so it can be > published and made available to the public. I have been receiving numerous > requests from colleagues and users who are eagerly waiting to use this tool > for their data analysis workflows within QGIS. > > Having it officially available in the repository would greatly assist them > in their work. > If there are any code adjustments, documentation updates, or standard > requirements that I need to fulfill before approval, please let me know. I > am fully committed to making the necessary improvements promptly. > > Thank you very much for your time, hard work, and dedication to the QGIS > community. I look forward to hearing from you. > > Best regards, > > Muhammad Parif > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 lova at kartoza.com Tue Sep 8 01:21:12 2026 From: lova at kartoza.com (Lova Andriarimalala) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 11:21:12 +0300 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] How to transfer published plugins to another account ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Lars, Indeed, there is no direct feature to "transfer the ownership" of a plugin to another account. As an alternative, I suggest adding the new user as a Collaborator and then making them a maintainer. You can perform this process from the plugin's details editor page using the old account, and it needs to be done across two save steps: 1. Edit plugin details > Add Collaborator > Save 2. Edit plugin details > Make new collaborator as a Maintainer > Save I hope this helps. Best regards, Lova Andriarimalala *QGIS Full Stack Developer * *T *: +27(0) 87 809 2702 *E *: lova at kartoza.com *W* : kartoza.com On Tue, 8 Sept 2026 at 09:52, Lars I. Nielsen via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > Hi all. > > > > I need to transfer a handful of recently published plugins to another user > account. > > > > The old account was created years ago, but my division became a separate > company last year, and so we have new emails and everything. > > Luckily I still have temporary access to the old email accounts, but that > stops at some point. > > When publishing the plugins recently, I just reused the old account > without considering the implications. > > I thought I could just update the account details. But it seems I can?t, > and I?m stuck. > > > > So I need to transfer the plugins to a new account. How do I go about this > ? > > > > > > Best Regards / Med venlig hilsen > > > > *Lars I. Nielsen* > > Senior GIS Developer, FME and Python Certified Professional > > > > Hovednr: > > *+45 6443 1200 <+45%2064%2043%2012%2000>* > > Direkte: > > *+45 6313 6849 <+45%2063%2013%2068%2049>* > > Mail: > > *lars.nielsen at lifadigital.dk * > > > > > > *LIFA Digital ApS* / +45 6313 6800 <+45%2063%2013%2068%2000> / > lifadigital.dk / CVR. 45285022 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 1551 bytes Desc: not available URL: From apasotti at gmail.com Tue Sep 8 03:29:41 2026 From: apasotti at gmail.com (Alessandro Pasotti) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 12:29:41 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] How to transfer published plugins to another account ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Lova, This is one of the few rare cases when your manual intervention is probably needed: back in the days when I was the maintainer of the plugin website, I did change the owner (or every other aspect of a plugin except for the basename) from the Django admin panel. Hope this helps On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 10:21?AM Lova Andriarimalala via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > Hi Lars, > > Indeed, there is no direct feature to "transfer the ownership" of a plugin > to another account. > > As an alternative, I suggest adding the new user as a Collaborator and > then making them a maintainer. You can perform this process from the > plugin's details editor page using the old account, and it needs to be done > across two save steps: > 1. Edit plugin details > Add Collaborator > Save > 2. Edit plugin details > Make new collaborator as a Maintainer > Save > > I hope this helps. > > Best regards, > Lova Andriarimalala > > > *QGIS Full Stack Developer * > *T *: +27(0) 87 809 2702 <+27%2087%20809%202702> *E *: > lova at kartoza.com *W* : kartoza.com > > > > > > On Tue, 8 Sept 2026 at 09:52, Lars I. Nielsen via QGIS-Developer < > qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > >> Hi all. >> >> >> >> I need to transfer a handful of recently published plugins to another >> user account. >> >> >> >> The old account was created years ago, but my division became a separate >> company last year, and so we have new emails and everything. >> >> Luckily I still have temporary access to the old email accounts, but that >> stops at some point. >> >> When publishing the plugins recently, I just reused the old account >> without considering the implications. >> >> I thought I could just update the account details. But it seems I can?t, >> and I?m stuck. >> >> >> >> So I need to transfer the plugins to a new account. How do I go about >> this ? >> >> >> >> >> >> Best Regards / Med venlig hilsen >> >> >> >> *Lars I. Nielsen* >> >> Senior GIS Developer, FME and Python Certified Professional >> >> >> >> Hovednr: >> >> *+45 6443 1200 <+45%2064%2043%2012%2000>* >> >> Direkte: >> >> *+45 6313 6849 <+45%2063%2013%2068%2049>* >> >> Mail: >> >> *lars.nielsen at lifadigital.dk * >> >> >> >> >> >> *LIFA Digital ApS* / +45 6313 6800 <+45%2063%2013%2068%2000> / >> lifadigital.dk / CVR. 45285022 >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > -- Alessandro Pasotti QCooperative: www.qcooperative.net ItOpen: www.itopen.it -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 1551 bytes Desc: not available URL: From lova at kartoza.com Tue Sep 8 03:40:38 2026 From: lova at kartoza.com (Lova Andriarimalala) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 13:40:38 +0300 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] How to transfer published plugins to another account ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Alessandro, Thank you for the tip. I will look into that. @Lars I. Nielsen Could you please communicate the name of the plugin and the new author so I can have a look? Best regards, Lova Andriarimalala *QGIS Full Stack Developer * *T *: +27(0) 87 809 2702 *E *: lova at kartoza.com *W* : kartoza.com On Tue, 8 Sept 2026 at 13:29, Alessandro Pasotti wrote: > Lova, > > This is one of the few rare cases when your manual intervention is > probably needed: back in the days when I was the maintainer of the plugin > website, I did change the owner (or every other aspect of a plugin except > for the basename) from the Django admin panel. > > Hope this helps > > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 10:21?AM Lova Andriarimalala via QGIS-Developer < > qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > >> Hi Lars, >> >> Indeed, there is no direct feature to "transfer the ownership" of a >> plugin to another account. >> >> As an alternative, I suggest adding the new user as a Collaborator and >> then making them a maintainer. You can perform this process from the >> plugin's details editor page using the old account, and it needs to be done >> across two save steps: >> 1. Edit plugin details > Add Collaborator > Save >> 2. Edit plugin details > Make new collaborator as a Maintainer > Save >> >> I hope this helps. >> >> Best regards, >> Lova Andriarimalala >> >> >> *QGIS Full Stack Developer * >> *T *: +27(0) 87 809 2702 <+27%2087%20809%202702> *E *: >> lova at kartoza.com *W* : kartoza.com >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, 8 Sept 2026 at 09:52, Lars I. Nielsen via QGIS-Developer < >> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi all. >>> >>> >>> >>> I need to transfer a handful of recently published plugins to another >>> user account. >>> >>> >>> >>> The old account was created years ago, but my division became a separate >>> company last year, and so we have new emails and everything. >>> >>> Luckily I still have temporary access to the old email accounts, but >>> that stops at some point. >>> >>> When publishing the plugins recently, I just reused the old account >>> without considering the implications. >>> >>> I thought I could just update the account details. But it seems I can?t, >>> and I?m stuck. >>> >>> >>> >>> So I need to transfer the plugins to a new account. How do I go about >>> this ? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Best Regards / Med venlig hilsen >>> >>> >>> >>> *Lars I. Nielsen* >>> >>> Senior GIS Developer, FME and Python Certified Professional >>> >>> >>> >>> Hovednr: >>> >>> *+45 6443 1200 <+45%2064%2043%2012%2000>* >>> >>> Direkte: >>> >>> *+45 6313 6849 <+45%2063%2013%2068%2049>* >>> >>> Mail: >>> >>> *lars.nielsen at lifadigital.dk * >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> *LIFA Digital ApS* / +45 6313 6800 <+45%2063%2013%2068%2000> / >>> lifadigital.dk / CVR. 45285022 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> > > > -- > Alessandro Pasotti > QCooperative: www.qcooperative.net > ItOpen: www.itopen.it > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 1551 bytes Desc: not available URL: From miguelenricoimperial at gmail.com Tue Sep 8 07:06:41 2026 From: miguelenricoimperial at gmail.com (Miguel Imperial) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 22:06:41 +0800 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Request please for PR review re QgsHighlight::paint() Message-ID: Hello. I made a PR that removes the per-pixel loop inside QgsHighlight::paint() which made identifying features faster. I would appreciate it if someone could review it. All the details are in the PR https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/67304 Thank you! Best, Miguel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nyall.dawson at gmail.com Tue Sep 8 12:47:43 2026 From: nyall.dawson at gmail.com (Nyall Dawson) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2026 05:47:43 +1000 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Request please for PR review re QgsHighlight::paint() In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 9 Sept 2026, 12:07?am Miguel Imperial via QGIS-Developer, < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > Hello. I made a PR that removes the per-pixel loop > inside QgsHighlight::paint() which made identifying features faster. > > I would appreciate it if someone could review it. > > All the details are in the PR > > https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/67304 > > Thank you! > Hey Miguel, There's currently upwards of a month delay for reviews for new contributions. Hold tight, someone will eventually get to it. Nyall > Best, > Miguel > > _______________________________________________ > 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 benoit.de.mezzo at oslandia.com Wed Sep 9 00:34:29 2026 From: benoit.de.mezzo at oslandia.com (Benoit D.-M.) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2026 09:34:29 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Add cpp plugin API for 3D view In-Reply-To: References: <2366de83-ade2-4fbf-96f3-c608d07f8bf7@oslandia.com> Message-ID: Hi, Currently, apart from the `./plugins/qgisplugin.h` file, there is no formal contract for the other C++ plugin APIs; if the C++ API changes, external plugins might break. We are aware of the API's instability and accept the risk that it may change in the future. Furthermore, converting this API to Python is far from straightforward, as the Qt3D objects involved cannot be exposed to Python. Have you any other concerns? Benoit. Le 05/09/2026 ? 01:17, Nyall Dawson a ?crit?: > On Sat, 5 Sept 2026 at 00:29, Benoit D.-M. via QGIS-Developer > wrote: >> Hello everyone, >> >> as you maybe know, we (Oslandia) are working on several 3D functionalities for our customers, that we aim to add to QGIS core. Among them are 3D editing capabilities. >> >> Nevertheless, the specific QEP discussion [1] about editing, points toward a broad technical redesign that is out of scope for our current project, this is why we propose to ship the features within a QGIS C++ plugin to gather users feedback and contribute to the discussion on the 3D UI. >> >> In order to achieve this we propose adding accessors to the 3D view that enable the creation of an external QGIS plugin in C++, incorporating the relevant features. These new API accessors will be considered unstable API and not exposed in Python. >> The changes are developed in the following PR:https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/67298 >> >> Do you see any drawbacks to these changes? >> > I'm not a -1, but my concern would be that we don't have any formal > policies for non-Python API. It's easy right now to determine if > you've broken the rules by just checking the changes to the sip > bindings and evaluating if they'd have broken any Python scripts. If > we introduce API that's solely for c++ plugins, how we will handle the > stable API? I can definitely see someone seeing all the unused lines > of code in future and (rightly!) killing them all. And if you scatter > "please do not remove" comments throughout the code, those will remain > forever and become a permanent road block to development, even if the > c++ plugin is dead or no longer uses that API. > > My gut feeling is that you should do this via the existing way, by > developing APIs that are sufficiently well designed to be eligible to > become part of the (python) GUI stable API. If you're dead-set on the > c++ plugin API approach, then a QEP formalising some policies for this > is needed first. > > Nyall -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tim at qgis.org Wed Sep 9 01:56:58 2026 From: tim at qgis.org (Tim Sutton) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2026 09:56:58 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Status of 3.44 becoming LTR? In-Reply-To: References: <20251104175111.2ieagxyfxlnxghhd@norbit.de> Message-ID: Hi all Last night the PSC met and discussed this (and thanks to Denis for joining us to discuss). We will share the full PSC meeting notes, but with regards to the LTR we propose to follow the following steps: - Create a new *LTR 4.x Blocker* tag for issues - Ask developers, Giovanni Manghi, Andrea Giudiceandrea to tag any breaking features with the new blocker tag so we have a clear sense of what needs to be done - Keep feature freeze until all blockers are gone. - *Stick to current schedule but QGIS 4.2 will no longer be LTR* - QGIS 4.4 to have a 6 week paid bug fixing period instead of 4 (and retain 6 week feature freeze) - Disable broken features if needed and communicate the feature regressions as part of the changelog - If there are still remaining blockers that we cannot simply disable at the end of the 6 weeks we will extend the release (last resort option) Does this sound good for everyone? Regards Tim On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 1:31?PM Denis Rouzaud via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > Hi, > > It looks like there is an agreement of having 4.4.x as the next LTR. > If so, can we adapt the roadmap https://qgis.org/resources/roadmap/ > So we can communicate (since LTR is supposed to happen in 3 weeks!) > > Cheers, > Denis > > Le mar. 4 nov. 2025 ? 18:51, J?rgen E. Fischer via QGIS-Developer < > qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : > >> Hi Greg, >> >> On Tue, 04. Nov 2025 at 08:59:06 -0500, Greg Troxel via QGIS-Developer >> wrote: >> > Yes, that makes sense and I understood the general plan. What I was not >> > clear about was whether, today, 3.44 *was* the LTR or just *is going to >> > be*. But from reading the roadmap, I convinced myself that today, 3.40 >> > is LTR, and in late February, 3.44 will become LTR. Confusingly, 3.44 >> > proclaims itself LTR in the splash screen, and it sort of is, kind of >> > like crown prince. >> >> Well, in my view the ltr is a branch that is longer maintained as >> others. So >> an ltr starts when it's branched off. >> >> We just build packages for the latest and long-term release and as that >> wouldn't make much sense while both are the same, we continue to build the >> previous ltr, while the new ltr is also the latest release. >> >> That way we still have two lines to build and the new ltr has some more >> time to >> replace the previous. That happens when the next version is released and >> takes >> its place as lastest release. >> >> That should also be the point were the splash is changed - which is >> usually >> with .4. That would have been - but should have happend with .8 on this >> branch. The splash change was meanwhile reverted. But I didn't bother to >> retag or do another point release just for this IMHO minor issue - the >> branch >> is a LTR branch. >> >> >> J?rgen >> >> -- >> J?rgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. >> +49-4931-918175-31 >> Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rhe >> instra?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 >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > -- *Tim Sutton* QGIS Project Steering Committee tim at qgis.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tim at qgis.org Wed Sep 9 02:23:14 2026 From: tim at qgis.org (Tim Sutton) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2026 10:23:14 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Rating abuse issue on the QGIS Plugins Website In-Reply-To: References: <4d70c538-b1b5-4c82-8172-9e87cd3fbcf9@gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi Just to follow up on this, we have discussed this in the PSC call last night. It was agreed that we will remove the rating feature from https://plugins.qgis.org and replace the endpoint with a no-op so that it does not break existing desktop plugin manager interactions, and then follow up with a patch to remove it from the plugin manager. For those curious about knowing if their plugin is being well received by their users, we will move the responsibility for this to you to build something into your plugin itself. Regards Tim On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 12:03?PM Tim Sutton via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > Hi all > > Thank you very much for all the feedback and comments. I had a chat > through this with Lova offline in one of our catch up calls and I am of the > opinion that we should just remove the feature entirely - both in QGIS > desktop and on the plugins.qgis.org web site. We are a small team and not > equipped to deal with queries and validation and reviewing inputs etc. that > comes with implementing a more robust system. > > So if there are no objections we will implement a noop on the api call (so > it doesn't break legacy QGIS installs) and then Lova and I will make a > patch to QGIS core for you guys to review and hopefully approve if we did a > good job of stripping it out. > > Regards > > Tim > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 5:06?PM Valentin Buira via QGIS-Developer < > qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > >> Hi Lova, >> >> > I agree that shifting to authenticated ratings with a proper comment >> system makes the most sense given the current situation. >> >> Thanks a lot for suggesting this, I had one bad review without >> explanation on one of my plugins, and it still haunts me to this day! >> >> If you're looking to draw some inspiration, I think over the years Steam >> really nailed the rating system in their game store. >> >> * They display two ratings, one rating average from recent reviews, and >> one rating average for the overall reviews on the lifetime of the game. >> * There is a bar chart with positive/negative rating along the year, so >> you can see the evolution and "review bombing" [0] >> * The review include info like hardware of the users, game version -> >> this could be simplified to QGIS Version and Plugin version, and maybe OS >> * Reviews always have comments >> * You can filter reviews by your language, date, rating, >> positive/negative etc... >> >> Of course we don't have to have as compelling a rating system (And we >> probably should not, we are not in the plugin selling nor video game >> selling business after all). But I think it's interesting to look at it >> anyway >> >> Cheers, >> Valentin >> >> [0] one good example of this is "no man's sky" than went from most >> negative to mostly positive alongs the updates >> https://store.steampowered.com/app/275850/No_Mans_Sky/#app_reviews_hash >> >> Le mer. 19 ao?t 2026 ? 11:57, Lova Andriarimalala via QGIS-Developer < >> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : >> >>> Hi R?gis and Denis >>> >>> Thank you for the input. I agree that shifting to authenticated ratings >>> with a proper comment system makes the most sense given the current >>> situation. >>> >>> With that change, I wonder if it wouldn't be simpler to start with clean >>> rating records for all plugins rather than migrating those who rated with >>> an account from the current obsolete ones. This will prevent recalculating >>> all ratings based on the new rule or considering removing any rating based >>> on abuse (which is difficult to determine) if we even choose to keep the >>> obsolete records. With clean records, we could easily add the >>> mandatory constructive comments feature as Denis suggested. >>> >>> On the QGIS Desktop side, this change will most likely require a QEP >>> first because the existing feature in current and previous versions will >>> break and I am not familiar with how to handle that. >>> >>> I can also prepare a detailed plan for the changes and announcement >>> accordingly. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Lova Andriarimalala >>> >>> >>> *QGIS Full Stack Developer * >>> *T *: +27(0) 87 809 2702 <+27%2087%20809%202702> *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.* >>> >>> >>> On Wed, 19 Aug 2026 at 10:43, R?gis Haubourg >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, and thanks for the very clear situation overview Lova! >>>> >>>> Firefox requires to log to be able to rate. I concur with Denis. >>>> Anonymous voting is now obsolete to me, as the ecosystem has grown and many >>>> companies rely on this ecosystem. >>>> >>>> I would have no problem with a communication campaign announcing that >>>> rating is no more authorized for anonymous accounts, and should only be >>>> done from the website, as I don't think we want to add a sign in feature >>>> from QGIS desktop itself. This feature would open the gate to a bunch of >>>> security / privacy /compliance issues that I don't thing we want to add >>>> complexity right now, as this is one strength of QGIS, to have no link with >>>> our public infrastructure and no personal data collection. >>>> >>>> So, I guess that would mean that we remove the rating feature from QGIS >>>> desktop and that the voting button only opens the web app at the right >>>> place. >>>> >>>> >>>> Best regards >>>> >>>> R?gis >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 19/08/2026 09:16, Denis Rouzaud via QGIS-Developer wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> We switch to osgeo logged-in users only and force to have a >>>> (constructive) comment? >>>> Otherwise votes are meaningless and useless I'd say. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Denis >>>> >>>> Le mer. 19 ao?t 2026 ? 09:07, Lova Andriarimalala via QGIS-Developer < >>>> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : >>>> >>>>> Hello everyone, >>>>> >>>>> Following the plugin rating abuse issue reported at >>>>> https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Plugins-Website/issues/416 and >>>>> https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Plugins-Website/issues/420, I wonder if >>>>> someone could help or share some thoughts about it. >>>>> >>>>> We have released some fixes to enforce throttles ( >>>>> https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Plugins-Website/pull/418), reject forged >>>>> cookies and add a cap votes per address ( >>>>> https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Plugins-Website/pull/423). However, it >>>>> is not fully working because every IP recorded against a vote is a >>>>> Cloudflare edge IP, not a real user IP. I checked 100 recent votes against >>>>> Cloudflare's published ranges: 100 out of 100 match. So the per-IP cap is >>>>> counting Cloudflare's proxy pool, which rotates per request. So, storing >>>>> real client IPs would probably require some discussions regarding GDPR and >>>>> retention angle. >>>>> >>>>> The reporter also asks us to (a) purge the fake votes and recompute >>>>> the affected plugin scores, and (b) require a logged-in account to vote. >>>>> Both are policy calls, not just code. And noting that the latter will >>>>> probably break how the QGIS Desktop plugin manager submits ratings >>>>> anonymously over XML-RPC. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks so much in advance for any input. >>>>> >>>>> Lova Andriarimalala >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *QGIS Full Stack Developer * >>>>> *T *: +27(0) 87 809 2702 *E *: lova at kartoza.com *W* >>>>> : kartoza.com >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 listQGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org >>>> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>> QGIS-Developer mailing list >>> QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org >>> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> QGIS-Developer mailing list >> QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org >> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >> > > > -- > > Tim Sutton > > *Kartoza Cofounder*Tim is a member of the QGIS Project Steering Committee > > *E *: tim 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.* > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- *Tim Sutton* QGIS Project Steering Committee tim at qgis.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From uclaros at gmail.com Wed Sep 9 02:34:03 2026 From: uclaros at gmail.com (Stefanos Natsis) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2026 12:34:03 +0300 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Status of 3.44 becoming LTR? In-Reply-To: References: <20251104175111.2ieagxyfxlnxghhd@norbit.de> Message-ID: Hi Tim, Thanks for the heads up! It is not clear to me which version will become the next LTR after 3.44.15 according to the suggested plan. Is it 3.44.16? 4.4.4? Other? One other thing that worries me a little is that the plan considers that the 4 "stability issues" are already reported, which I am not sure to what extent is the case. Best, Stefanos On Wed, Sep 9, 2026, 11:57 AM Tim Sutton via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > Hi all > > Last night the PSC met and discussed this (and thanks to Denis for joining > us to discuss). > > We will share the full PSC meeting notes, but with regards to the LTR we > propose to follow the following steps: > > - Create a new *LTR 4.x Blocker* tag for issues > - Ask developers, Giovanni Manghi, Andrea Giudiceandrea to tag any > breaking features with the new blocker tag so we have a clear sense of what > needs to be done > - Keep feature freeze until all blockers are gone. > - *Stick to current schedule but QGIS 4.2 will no longer be LTR* > - QGIS 4.4 to have a 6 week paid bug fixing period instead of 4 (and > retain 6 week feature freeze) > - Disable broken features if needed and communicate the feature > regressions as part of the changelog > - If there are still remaining blockers that we cannot simply disable > at the end of the 6 weeks we will extend the release (last resort option) > > > Does this sound good for everyone? > > Regards > > Tim > > On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 1:31?PM Denis Rouzaud via QGIS-Developer < > qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> It looks like there is an agreement of having 4.4.x as the next LTR. >> If so, can we adapt the roadmap https://qgis.org/resources/roadmap/ >> So we can communicate (since LTR is supposed to happen in 3 weeks!) >> >> Cheers, >> Denis >> >> Le mar. 4 nov. 2025 ? 18:51, J?rgen E. Fischer via QGIS-Developer < >> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : >> >>> Hi Greg, >>> >>> On Tue, 04. Nov 2025 at 08:59:06 -0500, Greg Troxel via QGIS-Developer >>> wrote: >>> > Yes, that makes sense and I understood the general plan. What I was >>> not >>> > clear about was whether, today, 3.44 *was* the LTR or just *is going to >>> > be*. But from reading the roadmap, I convinced myself that today, 3.40 >>> > is LTR, and in late February, 3.44 will become LTR. Confusingly, 3.44 >>> > proclaims itself LTR in the splash screen, and it sort of is, kind of >>> > like crown prince. >>> >>> Well, in my view the ltr is a branch that is longer maintained as >>> others. So >>> an ltr starts when it's branched off. >>> >>> We just build packages for the latest and long-term release and as that >>> wouldn't make much sense while both are the same, we continue to build >>> the >>> previous ltr, while the new ltr is also the latest release. >>> >>> That way we still have two lines to build and the new ltr has some more >>> time to >>> replace the previous. That happens when the next version is released >>> and takes >>> its place as lastest release. >>> >>> That should also be the point were the splash is changed - which is >>> usually >>> with .4. That would have been - but should have happend with .8 on this >>> branch. The splash change was meanwhile reverted. But I didn't bother >>> to >>> retag or do another point release just for this IMHO minor issue - the >>> branch >>> is a LTR branch. >>> >>> >>> J?rgen >>> >>> -- >>> J?rgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. >>> +49-4931-918175-31 >>> Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rhe >>> instra?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 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> > > > -- > > > > *Tim Sutton* > QGIS Project Steering Committee > tim at qgis.org > _______________________________________________ > 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 gdt at lexort.com Wed Sep 9 04:31:41 2026 From: gdt at lexort.com (Greg Troxel) Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2026 07:31:41 -0400 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Rating abuse issue on the QGIS Plugins Website In-Reply-To: (Tim Sutton via's message of "Wed, 9 Sep 2026 10:23:14 +0100") References: <4d70c538-b1b5-4c82-8172-9e87cd3fbcf9@gmail.com> Message-ID: Tim Sutton via QGIS-Developer writes: > For those curious about knowing if their plugin is being well received by > their users, we will move the responsibility for this to you to build > something into your plugin itself. I hope it will be clear that this can include a "push this button to report X", but that any kind of phone-home code that reports usage without an explicit user action is prohibited and grounds for immediate removal. I'm actually saying this instead of assuming it, because I remember a plugin author, within the last few years, suggesting that it was ok for their plugin to not only phone home that it was in use, but to send viewport coordinates to report the area of interest. From tim at qgis.org Wed Sep 9 04:46:48 2026 From: tim at qgis.org (Tim Sutton) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2026 12:46:48 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Rating abuse issue on the QGIS Plugins Website In-Reply-To: References: <4d70c538-b1b5-4c82-8172-9e87cd3fbcf9@gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi On Wed, Sep 9, 2026 at 12:31?PM Greg Troxel via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > Tim Sutton via QGIS-Developer writes: > > > For those curious about knowing if their plugin is being well received by > > their users, we will move the responsibility for this to you to build > > something into your plugin itself. > > I hope it will be clear that this can include a "push this button to > report X", but that any kind of phone-home code that reports usage > without an explicit user action is prohibited and grounds for immediate > removal. > > I'm actually saying this instead of assuming it, because I remember a > plugin author, within the last few years, suggesting that it was ok for > their plugin to not only phone home that it was in use, but to send > viewport coordinates to report the area of interest. > Ok this is probably something for a different thread. Lova and I have been working on the plugin platform to provide more information about the plugins and the rights they assume from you. Lets take it over to a new thread if you want to chat about this, but my intention is first to build tooling to let us tag plugins with things like "Requires Subscription", "Made predominatly using an LLD", "Uses networking calls" etc. and first start with a self reporting system so that users can decide if they are happy with the grants that a plugin asks of them. T > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- *Tim Sutton* QGIS Project Steering Committee tim at qgis.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gdt at lexort.com Wed Sep 9 05:22:30 2026 From: gdt at lexort.com (Greg Troxel) Date: Wed, 09 Sep 2026 08:22:30 -0400 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] plugins and reporting to author-controlled sites In-Reply-To: (Tim Sutton's message of "Wed, 9 Sep 2026 12:46:48 +0100") References: <4d70c538-b1b5-4c82-8172-9e87cd3fbcf9@gmail.com> Message-ID: Tim Sutton writes: > my intention is first to build tooling to let us tag plugins with > things like "Requires Subscription", "Made predominatly using an LLD", > "Uses networking calls" etc. and first start with a self reporting > system so that users can decide if they are happy with the grants that > a plugin asks of them. First, having tags like that sounds great. I get it that the plugin page says "Plugins are developed by independent organizations and developers, the QGIS organization does not take any responsibility for them." and that makes sense. But, surely there are some rules about how plugins must behave in order to be listed in the directory. A plugin that uploaded all of a user's files, or even the current project, or one that deleted things, would be judged malware and summarily removed from the repo. I would suggest that in addition to the antifeatures/uses-network tags, the plugin system adopt a rule that plugins must not engage in tracking at all. This means no plugin hit counters, and it means even more strongly no transmission of information about the user's data, including viewport coordinates. Probably, the rule should be plugins that lead to loading TMS/WFS/etc., which involves viewport disclosure, should refrain from doing so until the user has added a layer and thus given perhaps-consent. I'm thinking of QuickMapServices, which while it configures TMS that then receive information, does so in way that is straightforward and expected. I would not be happy if merely installing a plugin led to network fetches. I really don't know how many plugins would run afoul of this. I see it as an important security property. All that said, I realize that qgis downloads new versions of plugin metadata at startup and probably periodically. I don't find that concerning as: - it's from qgis.org - it discloses that the IP address is running qgis, and not more (If there is more sent, I would suggest fixing that.) From tim at qgis.org Wed Sep 9 09:08:53 2026 From: tim at qgis.org (Tim Sutton) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2026 17:08:53 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Status of 3.44 becoming LTR? In-Reply-To: References: <20251104175111.2ieagxyfxlnxghhd@norbit.de> Message-ID: Hi On Wed, Sep 9, 2026 at 10:34?AM Stefanos Natsis wrote: > Hi Tim, > > Thanks for the heads up! > > It is not clear to me which version will become the next LTR after 3.44.15 > according to the suggested plan. Is it 3.44.16? 4.4.4? Other? > Juergen posted an update to the roadmap here which I believe should clarify it for everyone. https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Website/commit/c04e682d33add7084f49c35d5910f5cac592583c - so it would be 4.4.4 according the schedule. > > One other thing that worries me a little is that the plan considers that > the 4 "stability issues" are already reported, which I am not sure to what > extent is the case. > > I think the best way we can address this is for me to put out something in the news feed / blog etc. announcing the change of plans and then to call on people to test 4.x and report critical issues asap. But yes that is an intractable problem that I think has no perfect solution. Regards Tim > Best, > Stefanos > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2026, 11:57 AM Tim Sutton via QGIS-Developer < > qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > >> Hi all >> >> Last night the PSC met and discussed this (and thanks to Denis for >> joining us to discuss). >> >> We will share the full PSC meeting notes, but with regards to the LTR we >> propose to follow the following steps: >> >> - Create a new *LTR 4.x Blocker* tag for issues >> - Ask developers, Giovanni Manghi, Andrea Giudiceandrea to tag any >> breaking features with the new blocker tag so we have a clear sense of what >> needs to be done >> - Keep feature freeze until all blockers are gone. >> - *Stick to current schedule but QGIS 4.2 will no longer be LTR* >> - QGIS 4.4 to have a 6 week paid bug fixing period instead of 4 (and >> retain 6 week feature freeze) >> - Disable broken features if needed and communicate the feature >> regressions as part of the changelog >> - If there are still remaining blockers that we cannot simply disable >> at the end of the 6 weeks we will extend the release (last resort option) >> >> >> Does this sound good for everyone? >> >> Regards >> >> Tim >> >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 1:31?PM Denis Rouzaud via QGIS-Developer < >> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> It looks like there is an agreement of having 4.4.x as the next LTR. >>> If so, can we adapt the roadmap https://qgis.org/resources/roadmap/ >>> So we can communicate (since LTR is supposed to happen in 3 weeks!) >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Denis >>> >>> Le mar. 4 nov. 2025 ? 18:51, J?rgen E. Fischer via QGIS-Developer < >>> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : >>> >>>> Hi Greg, >>>> >>>> On Tue, 04. Nov 2025 at 08:59:06 -0500, Greg Troxel via QGIS-Developer >>>> wrote: >>>> > Yes, that makes sense and I understood the general plan. What I was >>>> not >>>> > clear about was whether, today, 3.44 *was* the LTR or just *is going >>>> to >>>> > be*. But from reading the roadmap, I convinced myself that today, >>>> 3.40 >>>> > is LTR, and in late February, 3.44 will become LTR. Confusingly, 3.44 >>>> > proclaims itself LTR in the splash screen, and it sort of is, kind of >>>> > like crown prince. >>>> >>>> Well, in my view the ltr is a branch that is longer maintained as >>>> others. So >>>> an ltr starts when it's branched off. >>>> >>>> We just build packages for the latest and long-term release and as that >>>> wouldn't make much sense while both are the same, we continue to build >>>> the >>>> previous ltr, while the new ltr is also the latest release. >>>> >>>> That way we still have two lines to build and the new ltr has some more >>>> time to >>>> replace the previous. That happens when the next version is released >>>> and takes >>>> its place as lastest release. >>>> >>>> That should also be the point were the splash is changed - which is >>>> usually >>>> with .4. That would have been - but should have happend with .8 on this >>>> branch. The splash change was meanwhile reverted. But I didn't bother >>>> to >>>> retag or do another point release just for this IMHO minor issue - the >>>> branch >>>> is a LTR branch. >>>> >>>> >>>> J?rgen >>>> >>>> -- >>>> J?rgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. >>>> +49-4931-918175-31 >>>> Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rhe >>>> instra?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 >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> *Tim Sutton* >> QGIS Project Steering Committee >> tim at qgis.org >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> > -- *Tim Sutton* QGIS Project Steering Committee tim at qgis.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From celia.buira at gmail.com Thu Sep 10 00:34:50 2026 From: celia.buira at gmail.com (Celia Buira) Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2026 09:34:50 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Q(ueer)GIS Message-ID: Hi all, So... This email has been sitting in my drafts for a while now. But yeah I'm a trans woman. Some people here I know IRL are already aware but I have been on HRT[1] for quite few months now, and so now it's public knowledge too. I would be very appreciative if someone could review this PR to remove my dead name from the source code [2] ? My github handle also has changed to @CeliaBuira Obviously I left behind some digital footprint with the name Valentin. If you could update my name wherever possible I would also be very appreciative. And otherwise I guess that's life. For "backward compatibility", I still answer to my previous mail address, but please favor this one from now on Looking back at it there were probably signs honestly, I even left few easter eggs in my PRs for the attentive eyes. I want to stress this, yes QGIS is *also* made by trans people and for trans people. For me there is very few things more thrilling than seeing QGIS used to defend trans people[3] Special thanks to Even for this [4] it mattered more than you might think. Thanks to Denis for making it easy to transition workwise. And thanks many many thanks to all the Trans people before me, I'm standing on your shoulders Time to live to the fullest, I let you with a song from Caterina Caselli[5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNJBiGjOZvE Kind regards, Celia Buira, Formerly known as Valentin PS: now I have one more thing in common with QGIS, we both have a dead name haha [1] Hormone Replacement Therapy [2] https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/67370 [3] https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232020255.33672019. [4] https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/pull/11865/changes#diff-28e156e3da6c95c5547ae5d09012efde80e9573504165d3f3dbf44bfd9ec79dfR32 [5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNJBiGjOZvE From marco at opengis.ch Thu Sep 10 10:18:11 2026 From: marco at opengis.ch (Marco Bernasocchi) Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2026 19:18:11 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Q(ueer)GIS In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Celia, Thank you for sharing this with the list, and congratulations. It takes trust to write an email like that, and I'm glad you felt you could send it here. On the practical side: I see your PR has been reviewed. If you spot any other place where the old name still shows up (contributors list, website, Transifex, mailing list archives we can influence), send me a note and we'll fix what can be fixed. QGIS is made by the people who show up and build it. You're one of them, and that's what counts here. Welcome, again. And yes, we dropped the Quantum years ago and never looked back either. All the best, Marco QGIS.org Chair Marco Bernasocchi OPENGIS.ch CEO QGIS.org Chair OSGeo.org Board of Directors Find a meeting time on my calendar ! marco at opengis.ch +41 (0)79 467 24 70 <+41794672470> On Thu, 10 Sept 2026, 09:35 Celia Buira via QGIS-Developer, < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > So... This email has been sitting in my drafts for a while now. But > yeah I'm a trans woman. > > Some people here I know IRL are already aware but I have been on > HRT[1] for quite few months now, and so now it's public knowledge too. > > I would be very appreciative if someone could review this PR to remove > my dead name from the source code [2] ? My github handle also has > changed to @CeliaBuira > > Obviously I left behind some digital footprint with the name Valentin. > If you could update my name wherever possible I would also be very > appreciative. And otherwise I guess that's life. > > For "backward compatibility", I still answer to my previous mail > address, but please favor this one from now on > > Looking back at it there were probably signs honestly, I even left few > easter eggs in my PRs for the attentive eyes. > > I want to stress this, yes QGIS is *also* made by trans people and for > trans people. For me there is very few things more thrilling than > seeing QGIS used to defend trans people[3] > > Special thanks to Even for this [4] it mattered more than you might > think. Thanks to Denis for making it easy to transition workwise. And > thanks many many thanks to all the Trans people before me, I'm > standing on your shoulders > > Time to live to the fullest, I let you with a song from Caterina > Caselli[5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNJBiGjOZvE > > Kind regards, > Celia Buira, > Formerly known as Valentin > > PS: now I have one more thing in common with QGIS, we both have a dead > name haha > > > [1] Hormone Replacement Therapy > [2] https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/67370 > [3] https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232020255.33672019. > [4] > https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/pull/11865/changes#diff-28e156e3da6c95c5547ae5d09012efde80e9573504165d3f3dbf44bfd9ec79dfR32 > [5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNJBiGjOZvE > _______________________________________________ > 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 even.rouault at spatialys.com Thu Sep 10 23:39:39 2026 From: even.rouault at spatialys.com (Even Rouault) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 08:39:39 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Fwd: About organizing a general strike In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <70f1d0b1-ab19-47d7-b983-d30ed5908876@spatialys.com> Hi there, not sure everyone follows osgeo-discuss mailing list, but potentially of interest: -------- Message transf?r? -------- Sujet?: About organizing a general strike Date?: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 08:32:36 +0200 De?: Even Rouault Pour?: OSGeo Discuss list Hi, People are generally shy about expressing opinions that might appear to be revolutionnary, but it is always interesting to speak up to count forces So I propose a general strike from the OSGeo community Motivation: that's actually the gist of the debate there is so much things about why we could strike. But here in France, we don't really need a good reason to strike. This is part of the life style, of live hygiene. So here's my motion: "OSGeo developers start a general strike. Motives to follow up in next press release, or not." Starting with my +1 Even And no, this is not a prank. -- http://www.spatialys.com My software is free, but my time generally not. LLMs contribute to global warming and brain rot. Let's guillotine them! "Ah ! ?a ira, ?a ira, ?a ira !" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hackenberg at dev-gis.com Fri Sep 11 02:39:18 2026 From: hackenberg at dev-gis.com (Moritz Hackenberg) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 10:39:18 +0100 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] reopen PR Message-ID: <2fb3f45f-8a76-48d4-b1e5-a0621ae87a6f@dev-gis.com> Hello, Could someone reopen this PR, please ? I would like to continue Unique values allow null value checkbox - #62750#62750 I forgot to update the branch to remove the stale label at some point. thanks Moritz From gdt at lexort.com Fri Sep 11 04:08:09 2026 From: gdt at lexort.com (Greg Troxel) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 07:08:09 -0400 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [PROJ] Fwd: About organizing a general strike In-Reply-To: <70f1d0b1-ab19-47d7-b983-d30ed5908876@spatialys.com> (Even Rouault via PROJ's message of "Fri, 11 Sep 2026 08:39:39 +0200") References: <70f1d0b1-ab19-47d7-b983-d30ed5908876@spatialys.com> Message-ID: Even Rouault via PROJ writes: > -------- Message transf?r? -------- > Sujet?: About organizing a general strike > Date?: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 08:32:36 +0200 > De?: Even Rouault > Pour?: OSGeo Discuss list > > So I propose a general strike from the OSGeo community > > Motivation: that's actually the gist of the debate there is so much > things about why we could strike. But here in France, we don't really > need a good reason to strike. This is part of the life style, of live > hygiene. > > So here's my motion: > > "OSGeo developers start a general strike. Motives to follow up in next > press release, or not." I don't understand what the point is, even though I could guess a few things, perhaps damage to the community caused by LLMs and those who are willing to use them. I don't think it's proper for osgeo as a group (or any other group that isn't specifically constituted as politcal activism) to cross into politics other than what directly bears on osgeo's work (e.g. non-open data from governments, LLM-caused problems in the osgeo world). I don't follow asking people to approve a general strike for no stated reason with reasons to be provided later, that they might or might not want to sign onto. Overall, I feel like I must be missing some context. From delazj at gmail.com Fri Sep 11 08:12:51 2026 From: delazj at gmail.com (DelazJ) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 17:12:51 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Status of 3.44 becoming LTR? In-Reply-To: References: <20251104175111.2ieagxyfxlnxghhd@norbit.de> Message-ID: <6CFB5F03-2130-41B6-B904-EFE9ADFBB663@gmail.com> Hi, Le 9 septembre 2026 18:08:53 GMT+02:00, Tim Sutton via QGIS-Developer a ?crit?: >Hi > >On Wed, Sep 9, 2026 at 10:34?AM Stefanos Natsis wrote: > >> Hi Tim, >> >> Thanks for the heads up! >> >> It is not clear to me which version will become the next LTR after 3.44.15 >> according to the suggested plan. Is it 3.44.16? 4.4.4? Other? >> > >Juergen posted an update to the roadmap here which I believe should clarify >it for everyone. >https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Website/commit/c04e682d33add7084f49c35d5910f5cac592583c >- so it would be 4.4.4 according the schedule. > Still, the roadmap looks wrong to me unless the rule of "third release is LTR" is abandoned. I mean, if 4.4 is the next LTR, 4.10 would be the one after, not 4.8 (and 4.14) as currently shown online. Regards, Harrissou >> >> One other thing that worries me a little is that the plan considers that >> the 4 "stability issues" are already reported, which I am not sure to what >> extent is the case. >> >> >I think the best way we can address this is for me to put out something in >the news feed / blog etc. announcing the change of plans and then to call >on people to test 4.x and report critical issues asap. But yes that is an >intractable problem that I think has no perfect solution. > >Regards > >Tim > > >> Best, >> Stefanos >> >> On Wed, Sep 9, 2026, 11:57 AM Tim Sutton via QGIS-Developer < >> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi all >>> >>> Last night the PSC met and discussed this (and thanks to Denis for >>> joining us to discuss). >>> >>> We will share the full PSC meeting notes, but with regards to the LTR we >>> propose to follow the following steps: >>> >>> - Create a new *LTR 4.x Blocker* tag for issues >>> - Ask developers, Giovanni Manghi, Andrea Giudiceandrea to tag any >>> breaking features with the new blocker tag so we have a clear sense of what >>> needs to be done >>> - Keep feature freeze until all blockers are gone. >>> - *Stick to current schedule but QGIS 4.2 will no longer be LTR* >>> - QGIS 4.4 to have a 6 week paid bug fixing period instead of 4 (and >>> retain 6 week feature freeze) >>> - Disable broken features if needed and communicate the feature >>> regressions as part of the changelog >>> - If there are still remaining blockers that we cannot simply disable >>> at the end of the 6 weeks we will extend the release (last resort option) >>> >>> >>> Does this sound good for everyone? >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Tim >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 1:31?PM Denis Rouzaud via QGIS-Developer < >>> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> It looks like there is an agreement of having 4.4.x as the next LTR. >>>> If so, can we adapt the roadmap https://qgis.org/resources/roadmap/ >>>> So we can communicate (since LTR is supposed to happen in 3 weeks!) >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Denis >>>> >>>> Le mar. 4 nov. 2025 ? 18:51, J?rgen E. Fischer via QGIS-Developer < >>>> qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit : >>>> >>>>> Hi Greg, >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, 04. Nov 2025 at 08:59:06 -0500, Greg Troxel via QGIS-Developer >>>>> wrote: >>>>> > Yes, that makes sense and I understood the general plan. What I was >>>>> not >>>>> > clear about was whether, today, 3.44 *was* the LTR or just *is going >>>>> to >>>>> > be*. But from reading the roadmap, I convinced myself that today, >>>>> 3.40 >>>>> > is LTR, and in late February, 3.44 will become LTR. Confusingly, 3.44 >>>>> > proclaims itself LTR in the splash screen, and it sort of is, kind of >>>>> > like crown prince. >>>>> >>>>> Well, in my view the ltr is a branch that is longer maintained as >>>>> others. So >>>>> an ltr starts when it's branched off. >>>>> >>>>> We just build packages for the latest and long-term release and as that >>>>> wouldn't make much sense while both are the same, we continue to build >>>>> the >>>>> previous ltr, while the new ltr is also the latest release. >>>>> >>>>> That way we still have two lines to build and the new ltr has some more >>>>> time to >>>>> replace the previous. That happens when the next version is released >>>>> and takes >>>>> its place as lastest release. >>>>> >>>>> That should also be the point were the splash is changed - which is >>>>> usually >>>>> with .4. That would have been - but should have happend with .8 on this >>>>> branch. The splash change was meanwhile reverted. But I didn't bother >>>>> to >>>>> retag or do another point release just for this IMHO minor issue - the >>>>> branch >>>>> is a LTR branch. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> J?rgen >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> J?rgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. >>>>> +49-4931-918175-31 >>>>> Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rhe >>>>> instra?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 >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> >>> *Tim Sutton* >>> QGIS Project Steering Committee >>> tim at qgis.org >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 apasotti at gmail.com Fri Sep 11 12:54:02 2026 From: apasotti at gmail.com (Alessandro Pasotti) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 21:54:02 +0200 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] [PROJ] Fwd: About organizing a general strike In-Reply-To: References: <70f1d0b1-ab19-47d7-b983-d30ed5908876@spatialys.com> Message-ID: More context can be found in the mailing list thread here: https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2026-September/040398.html -- Alessandro Pasotti QCooperative: www.qcooperative.net ItOpen: www.itopen.it Il ven 11 set 2026, 13:08 Greg Troxel via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org> ha scritto: > Even Rouault via PROJ writes: > > > -------- Message transf?r? -------- > > Sujet : About organizing a general strike > > Date : Fri, 11 Sep 2026 08:32:36 +0200 > > De : Even Rouault > > Pour : OSGeo Discuss list > > > > So I propose a general strike from the OSGeo community > > > > Motivation: that's actually the gist of the debate there is so much > > things about why we could strike. But here in France, we don't really > > need a good reason to strike. This is part of the life style, of live > > hygiene. > > > > So here's my motion: > > > > "OSGeo developers start a general strike. Motives to follow up in next > > press release, or not." > > I don't understand what the point is, even though I could guess a few > things, perhaps damage to the community caused by LLMs and those who are > willing to use them. I don't think it's proper for osgeo as a group (or > any other group that isn't specifically constituted as politcal > activism) to cross into politics other than what directly bears on > osgeo's work (e.g. non-open data from governments, LLM-caused problems > in the osgeo world). > > I don't follow asking people to approve a general strike for no stated > reason with reasons to be provided later, that they might or might not > want to sign onto. > > Overall, I feel like I must be missing some context. > _______________________________________________ > 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 Ellis.Symons at tuflow.bmt.org Mon Sep 14 04:10:03 2026 From: Ellis.Symons at tuflow.bmt.org (Ellis Symons) Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 11:10:03 +0000 Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Trusted status request for TUFLOW plugin Message-ID: Hi, I am Ellis, I am the primary author of the "tuflow" plugin (plugin ID: 970). I would like to gain trusted status (can_approve). We typically release 3-4 updates every month. My username is: ellissymons Cheers, Ellis Ellis Symons Senior Engineer GIS Integration Development Lead [Logo] TUFLOW Products | TUFLOW Pricing | TUFLOW Support | TUFLOW Training | LinkedIn Latest (August 2026) TUFLOW Suite 2026 releases available: Downloads -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 11147 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: