Hi all,
Thank you Bo for this extensive summary of reasons why we should keep
the LTR version.
I can only second that - from the perspective of being employed at a
public organization myself - and from the perspective of I believe the
majority of the Swiss QGIS users. The LTR version is certainly a success
in general and it is what most users want.
Let's rather fix the issues in the LTR release process rather than
killing it off because we sometimes run into troubles with it.
We should also think about all the good things that the LTR version
provided to the QGIS users (in general it brought a lot of stability and
increased reliability). Shit happens sometimes (like now) - and from
every problem we should take the opportunity to potentially improve our
project.
Andreas
On 2021-11-16 12:00, Bo Victor Thomsen wrote:
Hi all -
I have a few comments regarding the possible removal of the "QGIS LTR
versions" ( as one of the original proponents for having a LTR version
) :
* The LTR version is the version that almost _all_ QGIS-using
_organisations_ in Denmark is using. That means 40 - 50 % of all
municipalities, regions (counties) and a number of state departments.
And a lot of private companies too. They use it mostly in conjunction
with some kind of "Web GIS" and have QGIS for the hard and complex
stuff. This market penetration is on par with ESRI and better than
MapInfo. As a treasurer of the QGIS Denmark User group I've registered
85 Danish organisational members out of 260 members. And this number is
growing. So there is a large and growing number of QGIS users, that
prefer the LTR version (actually the vast majority if you count the
individual users in the organisations) .
The yearly fee from these organisational members is in large part the
reason why QGIS Denmark has a Gold sponsorship of QGIS.
I don't know about other countries, but I _guess, _that preferences in
organisations is roughly the same: They prefer stability and as few
errors as possible. And thirdly new glitzy features
* I we ditch the LTR versions, I fear that an old nemesis will
resurface: That there is not _any _version of QGIS that is really
stable: A small irritating bug in ver. x will be solved in ver. x+1.
However ver. x+1 contains another small irritating bug, that will be
solved in version x+2 ....
I know that the development process for QGIS has evolved tremendously
the last couple of years. However, I still remember the "bad old days"
with "no responsibility" for killing bugs in existing code caused by
introduction of new code.
* In my experience, the 1 - year period for LTR is the shortest period
acceptable for organisations. They don't want to repackage QGIS every 6
months and certainly not every 4 months. You might even let the period
be 1.5- 2 years instead of 1 year.
* The quagmire of ver. 3.16... Isn't it a combination of a relatively
old version of QGIS fine tuned to a set of support libraries, where the
support libraries gets upgraded "an masse" because OsGeo4W gets
upgraded from v1 to v2.; SIP gets upgraded from v4 to v6. And the proj
library goes through several upgrades from v4 to v8 ? I my perspective
that's a receipt for "The perfect storm". If it can't be fixed, then
freeze it at 3.16.11 and fast-promote ver. 3.22 as LTR, perhaps with a
big warning sign on it.
This it not a critique of the upgrade process. Every piece of software,
including supporting libraries has to be upgraded from time to time.
However I count 3 major upgrades of libraries on the same time
NB! Just read Jürgen's posting on ver. 3.16.14 being released on
friday. If it works, then that's solves the ver. 3.16 issues for me.
* I know, bug squashing is nobody's favourite programming discipline.
Especially if you not are paid for doing it. Hence the need for bug
squashin by payment. So what about trying to reach out to the large (or
small) sponsors and ask them if they could put some extra coins in the
pot earmarked for LTR ? I can't solely speak for QGIS Denmark User
group, but I would certainly discuss this problem with other members of
the board and eventually the general assembly. And we have some
contacts with the other QGIS usergroups i Scandinavia. The Swiss
usergroup could for example talk with the german usergroup (I know the
problem is not based on language, but sometimes it's easier to promote
an idea with people talking roughly the same language)
So how much money are we talking about ?
Whatever that's decided regarding the LTR, I personally still will be a
staunch supporter of QGIS. But please don't throw the baby out with the
bathwater without due consideration and without trying alternative
solutions.
Med venlig hilsen / Kind regards
Bo Victor Thomsen
Den 16-11-2021 kl. 09:22 skrev Alessandro Pasotti:
On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 8:50 AM Marco Bernasocchi <ma...@qgis.org>
wrote:
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
Hi,
thinking about how to possibly prevent this to happen again I think
that the manual testing cycles as proposed with
https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/2020-December/009186.html
could help in identifying biggest issues before a release.
I think we should consider the possibility of investing in that
direction.
Kind regards.
--
Alessandro Pasotti
QCooperative: www.qcooperative.net [1] ItOpen: www.itopen.it [2]
_______________________________________________
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
Links:
------
[1] https://www.qcooperative.net
[2] http://www.itopen.it
_______________________________________________
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
