On 10/28/2014 10:50 AM, Sandro Santilli wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 12:09:55PM +0100, Luca Manganelli wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Nathan Woodrow
wrote:
I think it makes sense to keep up with the funded bug fixing if we have
the money
Maybe the QGIS testing funding would fix
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 12:09:55PM +0100, Luca Manganelli wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Nathan Woodrow
> wrote:
>
> > I think it makes sense to keep up with the funded bug fixing if we have
> > the money
> >
>
> Maybe the QGIS testing funding would fix all these probelms? Now it's
>
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Nathan Woodrow
wrote:
> I think it makes sense to keep up with the funded bug fixing if we have
> the money
>
Maybe the QGIS testing funding would fix all these probelms? Now it's
funded!
http://blog.vitu.ch/10102014-1046/crowdfunding-initiative-automated-testin
I think it makes sense to keep up with the funded bug fixing if we have the
money.
On Sun, Oct 26, 2014, 4:00 AM Tim Sutton wrote:
> Hi Paolo
>
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Paolo Cavallini
> wrote:
>
>> Il 24/10/2014 11:06, Sandro Santilli ha scritto:
>>
>> > A blocker-free release makes
Hi Paolo
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Paolo Cavallini
wrote:
> Il 24/10/2014 11:06, Sandro Santilli ha scritto:
>
> > A blocker-free release makes the most sense.
> > If postponing helps fixing them (ie: something is on working on them)
> > then it is very worth it, IMHO.
>
> Does this mean
> +1
>
> I would also prefer an extra week for testing/bug fixing.
>
> Also, the list of "high priority" bugs is still very long. We should not
> only fix blockers, but also some of the "high" ones. There are some
> "high priority" bugs with crashes or severe malfunctioning.
>
> Andreas
* today a
Il 24/10/2014 11:06, Sandro Santilli ha scritto:
> A blocker-free release makes the most sense.
> If postponing helps fixing them (ie: something is on working on them)
> then it is very worth it, IMHO.
Does this mean we want to invest in some more bugfixing days, or that we hope
more
time will r
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 05:50:08AM +1100, Nyall Dawson wrote:
> So, we're a couple of hours out from release and unfortunately I don't
> think that master is in a release ready state just yet. There's quite
> a few serious blockers in the queue, including #11475, #11457 and
> #11455.
>
> But my re
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Nyall Dawson wrote:
> I think we need an extra week for
> things to stabilise and slow down before release. This worked really
> well for 2.4, which was one of the most stable QGIS versions in the
> 2.0 series.
> Opinions?
+1 from me. A couple of days later witho
+1
I would also prefer an extra week for testing/bug fixing.
Also, the list of "high priority" bugs is still very long. We should not
only fix blockers, but also some of the "high" ones. There are some
"high priority" bugs with crashes or severe malfunctioning.
Andreas
On 23.10.2014 21:10,
> So, we're a couple of hours out from release and unfortunately I don't
> think that master is in a release ready state just yet. There's quite
> a few serious blockers in the queue, including #11475, #11457 and
> #11455.
>
> But my real concern is that these don't seem to be slowing down - new
>
So, we're a couple of hours out from release and unfortunately I don't
think that master is in a release ready state just yet. There's quite
a few serious blockers in the queue, including #11475, #11457 and
#11455.
But my real concern is that these don't seem to be slowing down - new
blockers are
12 matches
Mail list logo
