[Qgis-psc] PSC Meeting log from 8/4?

[Tim Sutton]

Hi


> On 14 Apr 2015, at 10:23, Radim Blazek <radim.blazek at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 2:29 AM, Nathan Woodrow <madmanwoo at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hey all,
>> 
>> I'm not sure I am super keen to make a 3.0 jump half way (or more) though a
>> cycle.  If we are going to do 3.0 I think it needs to be planned out more
>> and QEPs done for the major changes.  Not doing this risks leaving users in
>> the dark on the API breaks and that never turns out well.    The main QEPs
>> and changes that need to be reviewed for the changes are the new geometry
>> stuff, PyQt5/Python3, removing old V2 methods and labeling stuff.  Might as
>> well do it with a bang if we are going to do it.
>> 
>> If we wanted to go with 3.0 then I would suggest skip 2.10 and extend this
>> period by 2 cycles so we have longer, get in review the API and QEPs, and
>> have a plan rather then "just break whatever whenever and then release like
>> normal".
>> 
>> I can understand that moving to PyQt5 might be a forced hand because of
>> platform changes and that it is really going to break our API whenever they
>> do it. If that is the case I think we really need a strong plan around it so
>> we can have it all done at the same time.  No point in releasing 3.0 with no
>> PyQt5 and then having to break again for PyQt5 a few months later.  Also
>> mentioning that PyQt5 seems to be Python3 only at the moment which can also
>> bring other issue so those need to be addressed.
>> 
>> As PyQt5 will break all the plugins again I think there needs to be some
>> good education around it.    Python 3 has been out for years and people
>> still don't move from 2.7, they didn't educate well and people didn't move
>> then same can happen to us.
> 
> I completely agree with Nathan.
> 
> I think that a new major release and API break should be announced at
> least 6 months in advance or more . I would like to do some small API
> clean up in the browser but definitely I cannot find time to do it
> before May 22.
> 
> Radim


All good points raised, and yes, publicising our plans long in advance seems like a good way to orchestrate a smooth migration and give people funding development a chance to plan their work. What does that mean in practical terms? Is the consensus then to :

* go ahead with 2.10 as scheduled
* announce that there will be no 2.12
* plan for 3.0 for year end of 2015

?

Just bear in mind that whatever course of action we choose, there will be people unhappy with the decision - so we should come up with something that works for as broad a cross section of our users as possible and then stick with it.


Regards

Tim


> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc