> > > It sounds good, but it's a false dichotomy - why can't you have both? > > because of limited resources. if all the 1.000.000+ users of QGIS would > invest 1 euro > per year in it, this would be quite feasible. > All the best. >
True, but that's back to my comment previously about what other projects do - there's bound to be OS software out there that also has very limited resources (most aren't supported by RedHat or IBM) yet manage a more rigorous testing regime. What could be learnt from them? Staying within the very-niche GIS world I know the GeoServer devs also complain about limited resources (it appears to have far fewer committers than QGIS), yet they have a unit-test requirement for all patches/commits and regular bugfix releases. I know it's not like-for-like, but it's indicative of what might be accomplished. Kind regards, Jonathan -- This transmission is intended for the named addressee(s) only and may contain sensitive or protectively marked material up to RESTRICTED and should be handled accordingly. Unless you are the named addressee (or authorised to receive it for the addressee) you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you have received this transmission in error please notify the sender immediately. All email traffic sent to or from us, including without limitation all GCSX traffic, may be subject to recording and/or monitoring in accordance with relevant legislation.
_______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
