Hi all, maybe from a voter point of view, this is uncomfortable to vote for last minute exemptions, as this does not have such sense from a democratic perspective. Voting is essential on strategic issues, but voting on "do you want this now, or within 4 months" may not appear so important - except if you funded the feature yourself.
As a user, I'd really want the two mentioned features for the next LTR, I've wanted them for so long. But in the other hand, I think we should really not end into a systematic feature freeze exemption process. I know QGIS is a do-ocraty, and we owe so much to our top contributors that we can't refuse them anything, hum... professionally speaking I mean:-) However having work still going on while in feature freeze does not help in dedicating fully to bugfixing and testing. Last point, some teams have been rescheduling hard and sometimes canceling deserved vacations to respect feature freeze deadline. Just to be clear, this doesn't concern Oslandia this time, but this happened in the past. Seen from this perspective, I'd like we don't repeat this at every release. Customer usually can wait for 4 months more. Regards, Régis Le mer. 5 sept. 2018 à 09:13, Matthias Kuhn <matth...@opengis.ch> a écrit : > Thanks Paolo > > On 09/05/2018 09:02 AM, Paolo Cavallini wrote: > > Hi Matthias > > > > > > Il 09/05/2018 08:35 AM, Matthias Kuhn ha scritto: > >> I think the approach to let voting members decide as we did last time > >> (https://www.loomio.org/d/38Aiya0q/3-0-soft-freeze-exemptions) works > fine. > >> > >> * This committee includes several technical members > >> * Everyone is free to vote or not, based on self-evaluation of > knowledge > > it makes sense to me - perhaps this should be particularly stressed in > > the voting question, otherwise people will feel obliged to vote (which > > often means +1) even when they cannot grasp the implication. > > Yes, we can state that explicitly. > > In the past, e.g. here > https://www.loomio.org/p/BPc3Wj6l/duplicate-feature-redigitized we had > 33% participation. Not sure what the reason for abstaining was, one > assumption would be that many did not feel comfortable enough to make a > decision. Or pure lazyness or disinterest ;P > > Regards > > > _______________________________________________ > QGIS-Developer mailing list > QGIS-Developer@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@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
