[Qgis-psc] QGIS 2.18 EOL approaching?

[Paolo Cavallini]

Hi Nyall,

On 26/12/18 23:23, Nyall Dawson wrote:
> Hi lists,
> 
> While updating the QGIS milestones on github today, I realised that
> our final 2.18 release is fast approaching! This raised two questions:
> 
> 1. Is it still the case that 2.18.28, to be released on 18th Jan, is
> indeed the final ever 2.x release? (Or has there been discussion to
> extend this?)
> 
> 2. If so, I think we should do some publicity around this (e.g. a blog
> post and social media push). I think it's a good time to promote a
> message like "the final QGIS 2.x release is coming soon -- this is
> your FINAL CHANCE to get fixes into the remaining official QGIS 2
> release. blah blah blah talk to your QGIS support provider or engage
> one of the commercial support providers listed on our website to
> discuss your requirements... blah blah blah .... If you still have
> QGIS 2.x scripts or plugins which need porting, you can also engage
> one of the commercial support providers to assist with a port to the
> new 3.4 LTR release. blah blah blah... The QGIS 2.18 LTR release saw
> over 24 months of patch releases, with 100s of bug fixes. This was
> made possible thanks to the QGIS project sponsors. Without these
> organisations the LTR release would not be possible. If you rely on
> QGIS in a commercial setting, we strongly encourage you to become a
> QGIS project sponsor too so that we can continue to create quality LTR
> releases which are supported for extended periods."

thanks for raising this important point. IMHO we cannot really dismiss
2.18 until qgis server 3 is ready for production. I understand we are
very close, I'd urge server people to update us on the current situation
and needs. If this is feasible, I'd be in favour of doing a last effort
(through dedicated crowdfunding or with internal qgis resources, if
available) to get 3 ready and dismiss 2.18 as planned.
>From another standpoint, we still have 102 Q3 regressions:
https://issues.qgis.org/projects/qgis/issues?query_id=27
>From a quick scroll, I suspect at least some of them are not
particularly relevant, but a thorough analysis is needed.
I'm not sure whether it will be acceptable for our users to release an
LTR with these regression, but this could be a way of putting pressure
on donors to help us fix them.
A big +1 for the blog post.
All the best.
-- 
Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
QGIS.ORG Chair:
http://planet.qgis.org/planet/user/28/tag/qgis%20board/