Hi Anita, Hi Nyall, Hi All I think that it is a good idea to allocate the first half hour (and more if needed) in tonight's budget meeting to this very pressing subject. Nyall, thanks a lot for your analysis, we'll use it as discussion base.
I extended the meeting invitation from 18:00 to 19:30. See you later Marco On Mon, 15 Nov 2021 at 21:37, Anita Graser <anitagra...@gmx.at> wrote: > Thank you Nyall for the candid assessment. > I'm ready to help wherever I can, which most likely comes down to writing > announcements. > We had the budget meeting scheduled for Tuesday evening but it sounds like > we should get on top of this issue asap. > > Regards > Anita > > 15 Nov 2021 20:57:36 Nyall Dawson <nyall.daw...@gmail.com>: > > > Hi lists, > > > > I'd like to start some conversation about the dire condition of the > > QGIS LTR release and what we can do to remedy/avoid this in future. > > > > If you've missed the conversation, our QGIS 3.16 windows releases have > > been completely broken for nearly a month now. 3.16.12 had a critical > > issue which caused lockups in Python code, and now 3.16.13 has > > completely broken projection handling (resulting in loss of CRS, > > hangups when opening projects, etc). > > > > So what do we do? I can think of a few responses we could make: > > > > - Kill 3.16.13 with fire. It needs to be removed from the website and > > all traces of the internet ASAP. Rollback to only offering 3.16.11, > > which is the last good Windows 3.16 release. > > > > - Put out a massive apology (and ask users to step up their funding to > > better maintain QGIS releases in future ;) > > > > - Mark 3.16 as an early EOL. (I can't see anyone interested in > > resolving the actual issue, so we've no way forward here in releasing > > a "good" 3.16 release again.) > > > > - Write the LTR releases off as a failed concept. (i.e. if we don't > > have the resources to maintain them properly, we shouldn't be offering > > them at all and should resort back to the single maintained release at > > any one time situation.) > > > > - Lower the supported period of a LTR release to 6 months? > > > > - Offer "theoretical" LTR releases ONLY as source code, but leave it > > to users to compile themselves and accept responsibility for their own > > packaging of this release. > > > > - Go on a funding drive so that QGIS can **pay** a developer and > > packager so that we actually CAN say we have stable LTR releases > > again? > > > > - ...something else...? > > > > Suffice to say, these are big issues, with big responses. But we're > > also under extreme time pressure here -- 3.16 is broken beyond belief, > > and we DO need to make some public responses asap (i.e. TODAY!!!!) > > > > Nyall > > _______________________________________________ > > Qgis-psc mailing list > > qgis-...@lists.osgeo.org > > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc > _______________________________________________ > Qgis-psc mailing list > qgis-...@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc > -- Marco Bernasocchi QGIS.org Chair OPENGIS.ch CEO http://berna.io
_______________________________________________ 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