[Qgis-user] Thoughts on QGIS Development and LTR Releases
Thank you for your comment Alexandre. I would vote for the 2 years for the long term release which I think would give time for all the new ideas and plugins to be matured. Would it be possible for the distinction between the current development release and the long term release which you have so eloquently outlined onto the first page of QGIS.org as it is a vital piece of information to have clear in your mind when deciding what version to download. Also there are two LTR's long-term releases and long-term repositories which surely is confusing when their abbreviated forms are used. Can we change the name for the repository to avoid confusion. Cheers Dr Iain Stuart JCIS Consultants P.O. Box 2397 Burwood North NSW, 2134 (02) 9701 0191 (0413) 380116 (m) ___ Qgis-user mailing list Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
Re: [Qgis-user] Thoughts on QGIS Development and LTR Releases
Hello, some remarks from someone who is still learning QGIS, having started in July 2018. I have to deal with very different software in my job, GIS being just a part of a larger set, and I cannot dive deep into it every day. This may not be the common case, but I can imagine, it is not terribly uncommon either. In only 18 months since I started using QGIS I had the pleasure to deal with the releases 2.14, 2.18. 3.4, and from now on 3.10 -- already knowing that 3.12 will be out soon. People I asked for help and tutorials I read or saw on YouTube all used different versions. I am not yet accustomed to QGIS as a whole, but versions are steadily changing, tutorials are changing, it is hard to keep up with it and to separate which tutorials are for the version I am dealing with at the moment. Not to speak about GRASS or GDAL or OGR issues that somehow turned up during upgrade. And there are problems with features that are said here and there to be not reliable (like in GeoPackages), but I cannot get hold of whether these problems are now solved. I am impressed with the progress of QGIS, the 3.4 version is definitely a lot easier to "get" than the earlier versions. Version 3.10 has some exciting features, and tutorials are already leaving version 3.4 behind, so that I just decided to upgrade now. -- But then, new versions are already going to be deployed soon, and I know I will be outdated when I start to really use 3.10. For people like me a change in the LTR cycle to two years would be wonderful. Point releases with only bug fixes and nightly builds for preparing the next LTR would be most helpful for people like me who are new to the software and use it only as one among many tools. This would guarantee that tutorials and documentation get complete for a certain version, that features are really stable. Other users are of course keen on getting new and better features as soon as possible. And I see the problem with testing for bugs, for which interim versions and nightly builds are helpful. This mail is not intended as a complain or a request for changing the LTR cycle -- although I would definitely welcome that. I just wanted to explain the point of view of a user who is less into the software and who would be glad to have less "noise" to separate from the real information. This mailing list is exceptionally helpful, tutorials and documentation are very helpful as well. All the best and thanks to everybody who is involved in this wonderful software, M. Shinoto > Am 01.03.2020 um 13:00 schrieb Alexandre Neto : > > Hello Iain, > > Please notice that LTR versions last for 12 months already. We are now > starting a new cycle with 3.10 as LTR and 3.4 receives patch during the last > year. Meanwhile, there has been some discussion about making the LTR last for > 2 years. > > Regarding documentation, as you said, it's volunteer work. And because our > lovely developers never stop adding new features, it's really hard to keep up > and we end up delaying the LTR documentation release for some time. I suggest > you try using the QGIS testing documentation for now as we are still trying > to catch up with all the work done since 3.4 (including some features from > 3.10). We still have a bunch of features to document, but we should be > releasing Documentation for 3.10 soon. > > https://docs.qgis.org/testing/en/docs/ > > Best regards, > > Alexandre Neto > > On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 9:56 PM wrote: > Maybe because I am an archaeologist, but I have always thought that Long Term > is a bit longer than a few months. In practical terms running QGIS in an > organisation you want the stability of LTR for at least 12 months so that > people can be trained and comfortable in using QGIS. I have found that the > documentation and training materials do not keep up with the changes and as a > new started it is disconcerting to follow the documentation and see a totally > different screen when doing one of the steps. Having the stability of the LTR > allows for training and documentation to keep up (especially since this is a > voluntary effort) and for users who are using QGIS as a tool simply to get on > with their work. > > > > I would vote for a LRT being defined as not changed for 12 months. > > > > I would disagree with the point that ArcGIS is better documented than QGIS. > My experience with my project team is that they found the various videos and > training in QGIS enough to get them going from scratch (i.e. what is this you > are doing?) to doing professional maps and limited analysis in QGIS in about > a fortnight. I think that the variety of documentation also helps. > > > > I would also note that although ArcGIS Desktop is updated on a regular basis > I have absolutely no idea what actually changes except that I loose all my > setups and styles with every upgrade. I suspect most of the ESRI love goes > elsewhere or the changes
Re: [Qgis-user] Thoughts on QGIS Development and LTR Releases
> Am 01.03.2020 um 13:00 schrieb Alexandre Neto : > > Hello Iain, > > Please notice that LTR versions last for 12 months already. We are now > starting a new cycle with 3.10 as LTR and 3.4 receives patch during the last > year. Meanwhile, there has been some discussion about making the LTR last for > 2 years. > > Regarding documentation, as you said, it's volunteer work. And because our > lovely developers never stop adding new features, it's really hard to keep up > and we end up delaying the LTR documentation release for some time. I suggest > you try using the QGIS testing documentation for now as we are still trying > to catch up with all the work done since 3.4 (including some features from > 3.10). We still have a bunch of features to document, but we should be > releasing Documentation for 3.10 soon. > > https://docs.qgis.org/testing/en/docs/ > > Best regards, > > Alexandre Neto > > On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 9:56 PM wrote: > Maybe because I am an archaeologist, but I have always thought that Long Term > is a bit longer than a few months. In practical terms running QGIS in an > organisation you want the stability of LTR for at least 12 months so that > people can be trained and comfortable in using QGIS. I have found that the > documentation and training materials do not keep up with the changes and as a > new started it is disconcerting to follow the documentation and see a totally > different screen when doing one of the steps. Having the stability of the LTR > allows for training and documentation to keep up (especially since this is a > voluntary effort) and for users who are using QGIS as a tool simply to get on > with their work. > > > > I would vote for a LRT being defined as not changed for 12 months. > > > > I would disagree with the point that ArcGIS is better documented than QGIS. > My experience with my project team is that they found the various videos and > training in QGIS enough to get them going from scratch (i.e. what is this you > are doing?) to doing professional maps and limited analysis in QGIS in about > a fortnight. I think that the variety of documentation also helps. > > > > I would also note that although ArcGIS Desktop is updated on a regular basis > I have absolutely no idea what actually changes except that I loose all my > setups and styles with every upgrade. I suspect most of the ESRI love goes > elsewhere or the changes are in the various very expensive addons. > > > > Dr Iain Stuart > > JCIS Consultants > > P.O. Box 2397 > > Burwood North > > NSW, 2134 > > > > (02) 9701 0191 > (0413) 380116 (m) > > > > ___ > Qgis-user mailing list > Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user > ___ > Qgis-user mailing list > Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user ___ Qgis-user mailing list Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
Re: [Qgis-user] Thoughts on QGIS Development and LTR Releases
Hi Groene, I agree that the Road map is not easy to understand. Just to clarify things (I hope): The current LTR is 3.10 (currently at 3.10.3). It only became LTR in February although its first release was done in october (3.10.0). The idea is to let it mature (and have a broader usage and tests) for at least 4 months before it becomes LTR. This means that for the next 12 months, more or less every month a new patch release will come out. That will be 3.10.4, 3.10.5 and so on. Only bug fixes are allowed on these releases, no new features. If there is a version with some extra number (e.g. 3.4.13-3) it means that something happened during packaging of the patch release, requiring a new package/installer to be created. You should always try to use the latest version of the LTR version, which should be the most stable one. Hope it helps. Alexandre Neto On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 7:11 PM Groene Bij wrote: > Hi all, > > > > Thank you for bringing up this topic. > > For me the release schedule and the different abbreviations are not very > helpful when choosing a qgis version to install. I am not a software > developer and thus have little understanding what the different releases > are all about. > > > > Clarity, however, is always appreciated, and that is the main thing > missing in this topic: > > > > Chris is talking about 3.10.2 having been labeled LTR > > Qgis.org right now (29th of February) is mentioning 3.10.3 as LTR > > The release schedule on qgis.org is mentioning 3.10.3 as LR with 3.4.13 > being the most recent LTR > > So things are unclear. Qgis.org itself seems to be unclear which version > actually is the LTR. > > > > The information on the Road Map page (schedule release) is also unclear: > > “The schedule is aligned to produce roughly the same dates for each year > given our four monthly releases with LTRs in late february.” > > Looking at the schedule, LTR’s are being released in October, not February. > > > > > > In this mail Régis says: > > “LTR does not mean stable. LTR means it will gain bugfixes longer than > releases.” > > What does this actually mean? Does this mean 3.4.13 will have releases > like 3.4.13-1 and -2 etc.? I do actually find them in the download section > ‘older releases’ or ‘previous releases’ (also no idea why there are two > different download sections). > > I do not find any information on the release schedule page about LTR’s > having different bugfix releases. The Road Map page only says: ´ Every > third release (starting with 2.8) is a long-term-release (LTR) *that is > maintained* until the next long-term-release occurs. To me, ‘maintained’ > can mean a lot of things. > > > > Considering LTR and PR: > > What exactly is the difference between 3.4.13 and 3.4.14? Does 3.4.14 > contain the same bugfixes as 3.4.13-3? The most recent release date of > 3.4.14 is 2019-dec-07 and for 3.4.13-3 is 2019-dec-05. > > Or does 3.4.14 only contain new features, compared to the original 3.4.13, > released in October? > > Additional information on how to ‘read’ the release schedule would be much > appreciated. I find the current information difficult to understand and it > seems to me it is written too much from a developers or IT-minded > perspective in stead od a general user perspective. > > > > Best regards, > > Jeroen Hovens > > > > > > *Van:* Qgis-user *Namens *Régis > Haubourg > *Verzonden:* donderdag 20 februari 2020 18:25 > *Aan:* C Hamilton > *CC:* qgis-user ; qgis-developer < > qgis-develo...@lists.osgeo.org> > *Onderwerp:* Re: [Qgis-user] Thoughts on QGIS Development and LTR Releases > > > > Hi Chris, > > I share most of your concerns, as much as I advocate the spread of QGIS in > enterprise and organisations. > > It is true we need always more reliability, documentation. I'd like also > to point that 2.x is not so far away, and that the reliability have since > improved by order of magnitude. > > Let's also keep in mind that the level of expectations of users grows very > fast too, so this is a race that will never end ;-) > > > > However, I think there is a cultural problem, and probably a pedagogy > effort we should make. > > > > LTR does not mean stable. LTR means it will gain bugfixes longer than > releases. So it is highly expectable that installing a LTR in its early > versions will let you hit more issues. I remember the very same situation > for ArcGIS 8 or 9 early stages. And this is the very same for linux > distributions or any software. I don't remember any early x.0 release in > QGIS that was not followed one week later by an urgent point release. But > new users don't know this. T
Re: [Qgis-user] Thoughts on QGIS Development and LTR Releases
Hello Iain, Please notice that LTR versions last for 12 months already. We are now starting a new cycle with 3.10 as LTR and 3.4 receives patch during the last year. Meanwhile, there has been some discussion about making the LTR last for 2 years. Regarding documentation, as you said, it's volunteer work. And because our lovely developers never stop adding new features, it's really hard to keep up and we end up delaying the LTR documentation release for some time. I suggest you try using the QGIS testing documentation for now as we are still trying to catch up with all the work done since 3.4 (including some features from 3.10). We still have a bunch of features to document, but we should be releasing Documentation for 3.10 soon. https://docs.qgis.org/testing/en/docs/ Best regards, Alexandre Neto On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 9:56 PM wrote: > Maybe because I am an archaeologist, but I have always thought that Long > Term is a bit longer than a few months. In practical terms running QGIS in > an organisation you want the stability of LTR for at least 12 months so > that people can be trained and comfortable in using QGIS. I have found that > the documentation and training materials do not keep up with the changes > and as a new started it is disconcerting to follow the documentation and > see a totally different screen when doing one of the steps. Having the > stability of the LTR allows for training and documentation to keep up > (especially since this is a voluntary effort) and for users who are using > QGIS as a tool simply to get on with their work. > > > > I would vote for a LRT being defined as not changed for 12 months. > > > > I would disagree with the point that ArcGIS is better documented than > QGIS. My experience with my project team is that they found the various > videos and training in QGIS enough to get them going from scratch (i.e. > what is this you are doing?) to doing professional maps and limited > analysis in QGIS in about a fortnight. I think that the variety of > documentation also helps. > > > > I would also note that although ArcGIS Desktop is updated on a regular > basis I have absolutely no idea what actually changes except that I loose > all my setups and styles with every upgrade. I suspect most of the ESRI > love goes elsewhere or the changes are in the various very expensive > addons. > > > > *Dr Iain Stuart* > > *JCIS Consultants * > > P.O. Box 2397 > > Burwood North > > NSW, 2134 > > > > (02) 9701 0191 > (0413) 380116 (m) > > > ___ > Qgis-user mailing list > Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user ___ Qgis-user mailing list Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
[Qgis-user] Thoughts on QGIS Development and LTR Releases
Maybe because I am an archaeologist, but I have always thought that Long Term is a bit longer than a few months. In practical terms running QGIS in an organisation you want the stability of LTR for at least 12 months so that people can be trained and comfortable in using QGIS. I have found that the documentation and training materials do not keep up with the changes and as a new started it is disconcerting to follow the documentation and see a totally different screen when doing one of the steps. Having the stability of the LTR allows for training and documentation to keep up (especially since this is a voluntary effort) and for users who are using QGIS as a tool simply to get on with their work. I would vote for a LRT being defined as not changed for 12 months. I would disagree with the point that ArcGIS is better documented than QGIS. My experience with my project team is that they found the various videos and training in QGIS enough to get them going from scratch (i.e. what is this you are doing?) to doing professional maps and limited analysis in QGIS in about a fortnight. I think that the variety of documentation also helps. I would also note that although ArcGIS Desktop is updated on a regular basis I have absolutely no idea what actually changes except that I loose all my setups and styles with every upgrade. I suspect most of the ESRI love goes elsewhere or the changes are in the various very expensive addons. Dr Iain Stuart JCIS Consultants P.O. Box 2397 Burwood North NSW, 2134 (02) 9701 0191 (0413) 380116 (m) ___ Qgis-user mailing list Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
Re: [Qgis-user] Thoughts on QGIS Development and LTR Releases
Hi all, Thank you for bringing up this topic. For me the release schedule and the different abbreviations are not very helpful when choosing a qgis version to install. I am not a software developer and thus have little understanding what the different releases are all about. Clarity, however, is always appreciated, and that is the main thing missing in this topic: Chris is talking about 3.10.2 having been labeled LTR Qgis.org right now (29th of February) is mentioning 3.10.3 as LTR The release schedule on qgis.org is mentioning 3.10.3 as LR with 3.4.13 being the most recent LTR So things are unclear. Qgis.org itself seems to be unclear which version actually is the LTR. The information on the Road Map page (schedule release) is also unclear: “The schedule is aligned to produce roughly the same dates for each year given our four monthly releases with LTRs in late february.” Looking at the schedule, LTR’s are being released in October, not February. In this mail Régis says: “LTR does not mean stable. LTR means it will gain bugfixes longer than releases.” What does this actually mean? Does this mean 3.4.13 will have releases like 3.4.13-1 and -2 etc.? I do actually find them in the download section ‘older releases’ or ‘previous releases’ (also no idea why there are two different download sections). I do not find any information on the release schedule page about LTR’s having different bugfix releases. The Road Map page only says: ´ Every third release (starting with 2.8) is a long-term-release (LTR) that is maintained until the next long-term-release occurs. To me, ‘maintained’ can mean a lot of things. Considering LTR and PR: What exactly is the difference between 3.4.13 and 3.4.14? Does 3.4.14 contain the same bugfixes as 3.4.13-3? The most recent release date of 3.4.14 is 2019-dec-07 and for 3.4.13-3 is 2019-dec-05. Or does 3.4.14 only contain new features, compared to the original 3.4.13, released in October? Additional information on how to ‘read’ the release schedule would be much appreciated. I find the current information difficult to understand and it seems to me it is written too much from a developers or IT-minded perspective in stead od a general user perspective. Best regards, Jeroen Hovens Van: Qgis-user Namens Régis Haubourg Verzonden: donderdag 20 februari 2020 18:25 Aan: C Hamilton CC: qgis-user ; qgis-developer Onderwerp: Re: [Qgis-user] Thoughts on QGIS Development and LTR Releases Hi Chris, I share most of your concerns, as much as I advocate the spread of QGIS in enterprise and organisations. It is true we need always more reliability, documentation. I'd like also to point that 2.x is not so far away, and that the reliability have since improved by order of magnitude. Let's also keep in mind that the level of expectations of users grows very fast too, so this is a race that will never end ;-) However, I think there is a cultural problem, and probably a pedagogy effort we should make. LTR does not mean stable. LTR means it will gain bugfixes longer than releases. So it is highly expectable that installing a LTR in its early versions will let you hit more issues. I remember the very same situation for ArcGIS 8 or 9 early stages. And this is the very same for linux distributions or any software. I don't remember any early x.0 release in QGIS that was not followed one week later by an urgent point release. But new users don't know this. They see a big green button "download that sexy new version". That said, how to improve the situation? After years of discussions in the various events, hackfest, conferences, discussions with public or private customers, developpers, here are the possible leads we have: - Keep on explaining the rationale and codes of free software to users and potential funders. - Try to keep our "power users / early testers" population, so that we target the right issues during bugfix sprints. - Offer longer LTR lifespan, so that funders have a larger window to actually find and have bug fixed. - Keep on explaining that QGIS bugfix release should be easily deployable in big organisations. OSGEO4W silent installs allows this. Maybe going toward auto upgrade / patch system could help (it's a big effort though) - Keep on gaining more budget for QGIS.org, so that we can setup a real semi automated Q/A acceptance test suite. This requires human tests. Boundless did, it is possible. It is a matter of ressources. Should it be centralized or community powered ? I have no idea, but this requires someone to be hired all year long to do this. IMO, enterprises requiring such reliability should really consider sponsoring this framework and dedicate some human ressources. - Same goes for documentation - Same goes for code review, we need to have more reviewers. the learning curve is steep though, and w
Re: [Qgis-user] Thoughts on QGIS Development and LTR Releases
Hi Chris, I share most of your concerns, as much as I advocate the spread of QGIS in enterprise and organisations. It is true we need always more reliability, documentation. I'd like also to point that 2.x is not so far away, and that the reliability have since improved by order of magnitude. Let's also keep in mind that the level of expectations of users grows very fast too, so this is a race that will never end ;-) However, I think there is a cultural problem, and probably a pedagogy effort we should make. LTR does not mean stable. LTR means it will gain bugfixes longer than releases. So it is highly expectable that installing a LTR in its early versions will let you hit more issues. I remember the very same situation for ArcGIS 8 or 9 early stages. And this is the very same for linux distributions or any software. I don't remember any early x.0 release in QGIS that was not followed one week later by an urgent point release. But new users don't know this. They see a big green button "download that sexy new version". That said, how to improve the situation? After years of discussions in the various events, hackfest, conferences, discussions with public or private customers, developpers, here are the possible leads we have: - Keep on explaining the rationale and codes of free software to users and potential funders. - Try to keep our "power users / early testers" population, so that we target the right issues during bugfix sprints. - Offer longer LTR lifespan, so that funders have a larger window to actually find and have bug fixed. - Keep on explaining that QGIS bugfix release should be easily deployable in big organisations. OSGEO4W silent installs allows this. Maybe going toward auto upgrade / patch system could help (it's a big effort though) - Keep on gaining more budget for QGIS.org, so that we can setup a real semi automated Q/A acceptance test suite. This requires human tests. Boundless did, it is possible. It is a matter of ressources. Should it be centralized or community powered ? I have no idea, but this requires someone to be hired all year long to do this. IMO, enterprises requiring such reliability should really consider sponsoring this framework and dedicate some human ressources. - Same goes for documentation - Same goes for code review, we need to have more reviewers. the learning curve is steep though, and we need to find money for this - Improve the website with a simple page, with graphics and videos on what is the lifecycle of QGIS, and what version to use for what expectations. A note about QGIS.org budget. To me, it is only a leverage, a catalyser, but it can't fund itself a full QA infrastructure with the current economic model of the association. I think, this is our responsability to spread this word everywhere so that the user / contributor rate changes a bit. After all, even Microsoft with its thousands of testers, and its early testing network was able to push updates causing the famous Blue Screen Of the Death. So shit can happen. Packaging nightmare with major changes in underlying libraries remains a really really complex process. How fast we are to fix and change our ways to do is the real question. I think the QGIS and OSGeo Community does a tremendeous work. Best regards, Régis Le jeu. 20 févr. 2020 à 16:21, C Hamilton a écrit : > I first want to say how much I appreciate all of the QGIS developers and > all of your hard work, but I would also like to suggest that you exercise > caution when you label a release LTR. I work in a large organization where > most geospatial analysts can have access to ArcGIS if they want it. The > advantage to ArcGIS is that everyone has been trained to use it, ESRI has > been around for a long time and there is a lot of documentation, training > and support for it. So why would users want to use QGIS? > > There are always a curious few who see QGIS and realize they can download > it for free at home. They tinker with it and come to like it and then they > try it in the workplace. For the users who have ArcGIS at their disposal > there must be a good reason to use QGIS instead. These tend to be the > reasons they use QGIS: 1) It does not crash as much as ArcGIS. 2) It is > faster than ArcGIS. 3) It can effectively processing larger data sets than > ArcGIS. 4) There may be some workflow in QGIS that is simpler than in > ArcGIS. > > I think that the QGIS community can be proud about the fact that most of > my users who start using QGIS love it and don't want to go back to ArcGIS > if at all possible. > > If a user finds that their reason for using QGIS goes away, they will be > disappointed, but will to go back to ArcGIS. I am an advocate for QGIS in > our work place. I think it should be used more, but it is really, really > hard to convince most people. Most of my users are not programmers so if > something is broken they don' t know how to fix it. We have QGIS support > contracts which help. Users consider the QGIS
[Qgis-user] Thoughts on QGIS Development and LTR Releases
I first want to say how much I appreciate all of the QGIS developers and all of your hard work, but I would also like to suggest that you exercise caution when you label a release LTR. I work in a large organization where most geospatial analysts can have access to ArcGIS if they want it. The advantage to ArcGIS is that everyone has been trained to use it, ESRI has been around for a long time and there is a lot of documentation, training and support for it. So why would users want to use QGIS? There are always a curious few who see QGIS and realize they can download it for free at home. They tinker with it and come to like it and then they try it in the workplace. For the users who have ArcGIS at their disposal there must be a good reason to use QGIS instead. These tend to be the reasons they use QGIS: 1) It does not crash as much as ArcGIS. 2) It is faster than ArcGIS. 3) It can effectively processing larger data sets than ArcGIS. 4) There may be some workflow in QGIS that is simpler than in ArcGIS. I think that the QGIS community can be proud about the fact that most of my users who start using QGIS love it and don't want to go back to ArcGIS if at all possible. If a user finds that their reason for using QGIS goes away, they will be disappointed, but will to go back to ArcGIS. I am an advocate for QGIS in our work place. I think it should be used more, but it is really, really hard to convince most people. Most of my users are not programmers so if something is broken they don' t know how to fix it. We have QGIS support contracts which help. Users consider the QGIS LTR to be a stable release. If you release the LTR before it is stable, then that can have bad consequences to our user base. QGIS 3.10.2 probably should not have been labeled LTR, but I have been actively telling our workforce not to use 3.10 yet. 3.10.2 still seems to have some serious bugs as it is frequently crashing (negating one of the reasons for using QGIS). There must be a WMTS problem that is causing it to crash and I have had a report that there is a serious memory bug. I am hoping that 3.10.3 will have solved most of these problems, but I am not going to count on it until I test it. Everyone has different uses for QGIS and different workflows and each person's experiences are going to be different, but I would suggest that you don't mark a release LTR until it is reliable. Additionally, I suggest that you never back port major libraries or capabilities into the LTR like what happened last fall. Only fix the bugs. As saying goes, "If it isn't broken, don't fix it." I still have users on QGIS 2.x and they love it and it works for their needs. I share this with you in the hope that it is helpful. The best to you all, Calvin ___ Qgis-user mailing list Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
