[Qgis-psc] Vote about release plan

[Tim Sutton]

Hi


Just read all the back  thread here. It seems fairly obvious to me that there is no compelling reason to move to 3.0 right now. Regis, Nathan and others who contributed comments your rationale makes good sense - and nobody was out to break API ‘just for fun’ - we do appreciate that it has a lot of downstream affects if we do that. If Nyall can achieve what he wants to on our current platform and nobody else can present a compelling reason to break API, I would suggest that we just leave things as they are for now and keep on trucking with 2.x releases for the next year or so.

Regards

Tim


> On 17 Apr 2015, at 22:55, Nyall Dawson <nyall.dawson at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 18 Apr 2015 12:44 am, "Nathan Woodrow" <madmanwoo at gmail.com <mailto:madmanwoo at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > > Does the composer change require QGIS 3
> >
> > Nyall has told me this isn't the case anymore.  I'm sure he can add more but I'm pretty sure it can just side by side until we remove the old stuff later.
> 
> Sorry for not replying sooner- been trying to juggle a whole bunch of work stuff and sick kids this week.
> 
> The situation is that in reality either way works for composer. I can implement the changes in parallel (no api break, users opt-in to new layouts engine), or with an api break.
> 
> That said, there's no way I can have this ready for merging without regressions for 2.10, so if 2.10=3.0 then the layouts work won't be a part of this.
> 
> My personal preference is to hold off the api break until we are forced to do so. If this is driven by the Qt5/pyqt5 situation, then let's plan around this. If it's driven by an urgent code need (eg geometry work?), then let's plan around that with the knowledge that at some stage in the mid future we'll be forced to address the Qt5 issue too.
> 
> So, my non-official vote would be -1 for 2.10=3.0, 0 for 2.12 =3.0.
> 
> Hope that clarifies the composer situation!
> 
> Nyall
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20150420/bf299fc8/attachment.html>