Re: [QGIS-Developer] Qgis 3.0 plugin dependencies status

Guys, Unfortunately all I can do now is to book the necessary time this autumn. First I have to address a few bugfixes in my badly limited time for QGIS. If nobody makes the QEP before, I'll come back to it after the summer. Regards, Borys Dnia piątek, 2 marca 2018 13:28:09 CET Richard Duivenv

Re: [QGIS-Developer] Qgis 3.0 plugin dependencies status

+1 for a QEP on this matter > Le 2 mars 2018 à 13:28, Richard Duivenvoorde a écrit : > > On 02-03-18 13:08, David Marteau wrote: >> Hi >> >> I stumbled on this post: >> http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/A-pipinstall-plugin-is-possible-First-What-s-the-difference-between-the-Osgeo4w-Shell-td

Re: [QGIS-Developer] Qgis 3.0 plugin dependencies status

On 02-03-18 13:08, David Marteau wrote: > Hi > > I stumbled on this post: > http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/A-pipinstall-plugin-is-possible-First-What-s-the-difference-between-the-Osgeo4w-Shell-td5107633.html > > What it the status of the problem of plugin dependency for Qgis3 ? > Is there

[QGIS-Developer] Qgis 3.0 plugin dependencies status

Hi I stumbled on this post: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/A-pipinstall-plugin-is-possible-First-What-s-the-difference-between-the-Osgeo4w-Shell-td5107633.html What it the status of the problem of plugin dependency for Qgis3 ? Is there anything done so far ? Thx David _

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Sluggish on MacOS 10.13 with Retina Display

Hi Nyall, On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 6:51 PM, Nyall Dawson wrote: > > > I'm just saying that there's nothing QGIS specific there - so there's > no clues there wherever it's a generic Qt issue or a QGIS regression. > I'm using xcode's instruments, but I've never really developed in any code on MacOS

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Sluggish on MacOS 10.13 with Retina Display

On 21 February 2018 at 07:31, Jeremy Palmer wrote: > Hi Nyall, > > On 21/02/2018 10:12, "Nyall Dawson" wrote: > > There's not much to go on in that stack - it's all Qt internals. > > > What would you like to see? I'm just saying that there's nothing QGIS specific there - so there's no clues ther

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Sluggish on MacOS 10.13 with Retina Display

Hi Nyall, On 21/02/2018 10:12, "Nyall Dawson" wrote: There's not much to go on in that stack - it's all Qt internals. What would you like to see? Are you sure this isn't solely due to the fact that QGIS is painting so many more pixels? I'd like to see a test where you force a low dpi resolut

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Sluggish on MacOS 10.13 with Retina Display

On 21 February 2018 at 06:34, Jeremy Palmer wrote: > Hi All, > > For some time I've been noticing that QGIS 3.0 on MacOSX has sluggish canvas > redraw speeds. When comparing between QGIS 2.18 and 3.0 I see ~4x more CPU > activity in 3.0 when performing the same set of operations on the same > data

[QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Sluggish on MacOS 10.13 with Retina Display

Hi All, For some time I've been noticing that QGIS 3.0 on MacOSX has sluggish canvas redraw speeds. When comparing between QGIS 2.18 and 3.0 I see ~4x more CPU activity in 3.0 when performing the same set of operations on the same dataset. My test case was using a single raster VRT with overviews

[QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Processing plugin - handling multiple outputs

I'm updating my QGIS processing plugin algorithm from 2x - 3x. The algorithm generates and outputs one to many rasters. The number of output rasters is unknown until the algorithm is run and depends on the input parameters. In my QGIS 2x version, I just set a processing.core.outputs.OutputDirecto

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Soft Feature Freeze

Hi Tim, The bug fixing programme already started - I believe there are still funds to support bug fixing so those interested should register with Andreas (who can also confirm if there are still funds available). Agreed it will be good to step it up over this month as we ramp up to release.

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Soft Feature Freeze

Hi > On 03 Jan 2018, at 02:34, Denis Rouzaud wrote: > > > > > Ok, let me re-word option 2 as: > > "2. Carefully manage release expectations, with detailed explanations > of known issues and regressions in the release notes. Stress in press > releases/release notes that 3.0 is a new major rel

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Soft Feature Freeze

I'm -1 to label 3.0 a "beta" product. I'd argue that in many respects, 3.0 is a more stable and reliable product than 2.18. On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 10:14 AM, Bernd Vogelgesang wrote: > Am 02.01.2018, 23:39 Uhr, schrieb Nyall Dawson : > > > >>> I think on balance I prefer option #2 as it will get

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Soft Feature Freeze

Am 02.01.2018, 23:39 Uhr, schrieb Nyall Dawson : I think on balance I prefer option #2 as it will get more people using QGIS 3 - we must just be careful to tell people that it is ‘next-gen’ and that the LTR is still 2.18…. Ok, let me re-word option 2 as: "2. Carefully manage release exp

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Soft Feature Freeze

> > > > > Ok, let me re-word option 2 as: > > "2. Carefully manage release expectations, with detailed explanations > of known issues and regressions in the release notes. Stress in press > releases/release notes that 3.0 is a new major release and that the > QGIS team do not consider it a suitable

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Soft Feature Freeze

Fully agreed, both with the general meaning and with the wording. Thanks. Il 2 gennaio 2018 23:39:17 CET, Nyall Dawson ha scritto: >On 3 January 2018 at 06:51, Tim Sutton wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> On 02 Jan 2018, at 12:16, Nyall Dawson >wrote: >> >> On 2 January 2018 at 19:54, Mathieu Pellerin >w

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Soft Feature Freeze

On 3 January 2018 at 06:51, Tim Sutton wrote: > > Hi > > On 02 Jan 2018, at 12:16, Nyall Dawson wrote: > > On 2 January 2018 at 19:54, Mathieu Pellerin wrote: > > > +1 to set a release date for the last week of January. That'll give us 2 > weeks of freeze period (assuming the vote turns out not

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Soft Feature Freeze

Not a major contributor by any means, but I agree with Tim on this. James Shaeffer > I think on balance I prefer option #2 as it will get more people using QGIS 3 > - we must just be careful to tell people that it is ‘next-gen’ and that the > LTR is still 2.18…. > >Regards > >Tim _

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Soft Feature Freeze

Hi > On 02 Jan 2018, at 12:16, Nyall Dawson wrote: > > On 2 January 2018 at 19:54, Mathieu Pellerin wrote: >> >> +1 to set a release date for the last week of January. That'll give us 2 >> weeks of freeze period (assuming the vote turns out not to extend the soft >> freeze) which can be used

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Soft Feature Freeze

+1 for freeze and more bug fix... I've report about processing regresións On Tuesday, 2 January 2018, Nyall Dawson wrote: > On 2 January 2018 at 19:54, Mathieu Pellerin wrote: > > > > +1 to set a release date for the last week of January. That'll give us 2 > weeks of freeze period (assuming the

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Soft Feature Freeze

On 2 January 2018 at 19:54, Mathieu Pellerin wrote: > > +1 to set a release date for the last week of January. That'll give us 2 > weeks of freeze period (assuming the vote turns out not to extend the soft > freeze) which can be used to focus on fixes only. The soft freeze period saw > a nice s

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Soft Feature Freeze

+1 to set a release date for the last week of January. That'll give us 2 weeks of freeze period (assuming the vote turns out not to extend the soft freeze) which can be used to focus on fixes only. The soft freeze period saw a nice set of fixes too, which was nice. On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 4:48 PM

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Soft Feature Freeze

I think we really need some more bug fixing time. I noticed all the layouts stuff from Nyall is now there but given the large amount of work more time would be good IMO. - Nathan On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 7:45 PM, Tim Sutton wrote: > Hi > > For my part I think we can go ahead and set a date for t

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Soft Feature Freeze

Hi For my part I think we can go ahead and set a date for the freeze (e.g. Friday) - Etienne still needs to commit the last metadata serialisation stuff but he has kindly come back from leave for a day to finish that. Stephané wanted to merge the OGC filters stuff which is fine for me. Do we

[QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Soft Feature Freeze

Hi all, for the first time, a good part of developers are uncertain about the need to postpone the freeze. IMHO it is better to discuss about his in the list. From my point of view, we should postpone it only if there is a real, strong necessity, which does not seem the case now. Opinions? All the

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 beta

Am 08.07.2017 um 10:13 schrieb Matthias Kuhn: Hi all, Not too far away we will enter feature freeze for QGIS 3.0 and will be trying to polish the next release as much as possible. During this time, a lot of testing will need to be done in order to be able to best spend the bugfixing time. There

[QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 binaries for MacOS

Is it possible to find QGIS 3.0 development builds as binaries for MacOS (like it used to be on http://qgis.dakotacarto.com)? I would like to try and give you feedback about new version of QGIS but building from source is to much time consuming to incorporate it in my workflow. Regards

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 beta

Hi I would lean towards -1 for a beta - we have had this same debate numerous times before and tried using beta's before. I don't think a beta will substantially increase testing uptake and it has the rather bad side effect that people will be using old code as their reference point (as opposed t

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 beta

Hi Richard, On Sat, 08. Jul 2017 at 12:43:48 +0200, Richard Duivenvoorde wrote: > Just for clarity, there IS already a possibility to test/view current > master (3.0 development version == 2.99) for Windows users: > > Either download the latest weekly 2.99 standalone installer from: > http://qgis

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 beta

On 08-07-17 11:48, Wondimagegn Tesfaye wrote: > Dear Mattias, > > Thank you for the hard work! This is a good approach. Starting to > testing the beta before the feature freeze is good to incorporate more > feedback from the users and developers. Just for clarity, there IS already a possibility

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 beta

Dear Mattias, Thank you for the hard work! This is a good approach. Starting to testing the beta before the feature freeze is good to incorporate more feedback from the users and developers. Regards, Wondimagegn On Jul 8, 2017 11:13, "Matthias Kuhn" wrote: > Hi all, > > Not too far away we wil

Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 beta

On 08-07-17 10:13, Matthias Kuhn wrote: > Hi all, > > Not too far away we will enter feature freeze for QGIS 3.0 and will be > trying to polish the next release as much as possible. > > During this time, a lot of testing will need to be done in order to be > able to best spend the bugfixing time.

[QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 beta

Hi all, Not too far away we will enter feature freeze for QGIS 3.0 and will be trying to polish the next release as much as possible. During this time, a lot of testing will need to be done in order to be able to best spend the bugfixing time. There are a handful of people who regularly test nigh

[QGIS-Developer] QGIS 3.0 Error: module 'PyQt5.QtWidgets' has no attribute 'QgsDockWidget'

I am attempting to switch from QDockWidget to QgsDockWidget with my Lat Lon Tools plugin for QGIS 3.0. I am getting this error: File "C:\OSGEO4~1\apps\Python36\lib\site-packages\PyQt5\uic\__init__.py", line 203, in loadUiType return (ui_globals[winfo["uiclass"]], getattr(QtWidgets, winfo["ba

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0: Plans to support librttopo?

On 7 March 2017 at 16:31, Mark Johnson wrote: >>> I'm confused - what is missing? > > The topic here is that when using MapUnits > - where the MapUnits are degrees > that a constant value (valid around the world) is not possible. > > If you set this to 5 (intended as meters on the map) > - the fur

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0: Plans to support librttopo?

>> I'm confused - what is missing? The topic here is that when using MapUnits - where the MapUnits are degrees that a constant value (valid around the world) is not possible. If you set this to 5 (intended as meters on the map) - the further you zoom in, the circle will get bigger always showing

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0: Plans to support librttopo?

On 7 March 2017 at 15:37, Mark Johnson wrote: >>> Everything you need should already be encapsulated in QgsRenderContext >>> (and the QgsMapToPixel member). > > For everything but degrees it is. > But in the case of degrees is is not > - there the (incorrect) assumption is being made that the worl

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0: Plans to support librttopo?

>> Everything you need should already be encapsulated in QgsRenderContext >> (and the QgsMapToPixel member). For everything but degrees it is. But in the case of degrees is is not - there the (incorrect) assumption is being made that the world is flat The value being used for DEGREE_TO_METER 11131

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0: Plans to support librttopo?

On 6 March 2017 at 23:45, Mark Johnson wrote: > The spatialite function 'ST_Project' is based on the librttopo functionality > (formally LWGEOM) > - and is only available when compiled with '--enable-rttopo' > > https://git.osgeo.org/gogs/rttopo/librttopo > > So if a support for 'Meters as Map uni

[Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0: Plans to support librttopo?

The spatialite function 'ST_Project' is based on the librttopo functionality (formally LWGEOM) - and is only available when compiled with '--enable-rttopo' https://git.osgeo.org/gogs/rttopo/librttopo So if a support for 'Meters as Map units' was desired, in the case of degrees - the use the librt

[Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0 API related issues

Hi all, A new Github issue tracker has been created (thanks Paolo!) to track discussion relating to potential API changes in QGIS 3.0: https://github.com/qgis/qgis3.0_api/issues I'd encourage you to post your thoughts there so that we can start to get a feel for the amount of work desired for th

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

Hi Nyall >- geometry rework, where an api break would result in a better >foundation moving forward For the geometry rework, it is not a problem to keep compatibility with 2. It is even an advantage, as there is more time to adapt the numerous pieces of code that work with QgsGeometry. I thi

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

**If I may** +1 for LTS or LTR Il 08/11/2014 15.09, G. Allegri ha scritto: +1 for LTS (2.6 or 2.8?). A new API break risks to make users (and plugin developers) quite nervous! IMHO as an user myself i think that a working tool is more valuable than a new tool, E.G. the coming QEP from Ny

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

+1 for LTS (2.6 or 2.8?). A new API break risks to make users (and plugin developers) quite nervous! E.G. the coming QEP from Nyall (about Composer refactoring) breaks Composer gui API, while it should mantain core. This could be included in an LTS release, while in QGIS 3.0 back compatibility can

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

Yes, 2.8 LTR is the least we need to do for users that spent time to update to 2.0. Matthias On 08.11.2014 12:27, Anita Graser wrote: > On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Nathan Woodrow wrote: >> Personally I think we should still do 2.8, LTR it, and then we can do 3.0 >> for the next release. >> >

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Nathan Woodrow wrote: > Personally I think we should still do 2.8, LTR it, and then we can do 3.0 > for the next release. > > Breaking the API again without a LTR in place makes me nervous as the 2.0 > API really wasn't that long ago. +1 and even without officiall

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Nathan Woodrow wrote: > Personally I think we should still do 2.8, LTR it, and then we can do 3.0 > for the next release. I agree with a LTS version (what's LTR??? :-) ). It should be important that the 2.X will not be "abbandoned" like as the last 1.X series (1.8)

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Il 08/11/2014 10:15, Matthias Kuhn ha scritto: > Please don't list Qt5 in breakages. sorry, maybe I misunderstood, but thought the plugins have to be somewhat fixed. All the best. - -- Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu QGIS & PostGIS courses: http:/

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

On 08.11.2014 11:22, Nyall Dawson wrote: > > > On 08/11/2014 9:05 pm, "Matthias Kuhn" > wrote: > > > > > > * Introducing Qt5 support in the QGIS source code does not break > anything. > > * Your distro actually shipping QGIS {2,3} compiled against Qt5 may > > break

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

On 08/11/2014 9:05 pm, "Matthias Kuhn" wrote: > > > * Introducing Qt5 support in the QGIS source code does not break anything. > * Your distro actually shipping QGIS {2,3} compiled against Qt5 may > break stuff. > Makes sense now, thanks. However, by Debian removing Qt4, aren't we effectively

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

Hi, The confusion comes from that there are two different things: * Qt5 compatibility * Qt5 binaries The first one is a thing about the QGIS source code (qt5 branch). The second one is about compiling/packaging. The first step does not break anything. And allows to deprecate certain features

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

Also PyQt4 imports won't work anymore so that would be a break right? On Sat, Nov 8, 2014, 7:52 PM Nyall Dawson wrote: > > On 08/11/2014 8:15 pm, "Matthias Kuhn" wrote: > > > > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > Hi Paolo, > > > > Please don't list Qt5 in breakages. >

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

On 08/11/2014 8:15 pm, "Matthias Kuhn" wrote: > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi Paolo, > > Please don't list Qt5 in breakages. > Hi Matthias, I'm a little confused - I was under the impression that some web related classes had been removed from qt5 (hence the mention o

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Paolo, Please don't list Qt5 in breakages. Thank you Matthias On 08.11.2014 09:46, Paolo Cavallini wrote: > Il 08/11/2014 09:42, Matthias Kuhn ha scritto: > > > QGIS 3 should come with python 3. I don't think that python 3 can > > be a smooth tr

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Il 08/11/2014 09:42, Matthias Kuhn ha scritto: > QGIS 3 should come with python 3. I don't think that python 3 can > be a smooth transition so this would require us to make QGIS 4 and > break plugins once again. > > Qt5 support does not require QGIS

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

Hi QGIS 3 should come with python 3. I don't think that python 3 can be a smooth transition so this would require us to make QGIS 4 and break plugins once again. Qt5 support does not require QGIS 3. Geometry and Composer(Layout) may need QGIS 3. But then we can as well just introduce python 3 as

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

Hello Nathan, > Personally I think we should still do 2.8, LTR it, and then we can do 3.0 for > the next release. > > Breaking the API again without a LTR in place makes me nervous as the 2.0 API > really wasn't that long ago. +1000 for LTS I am with you: please, stop to change the api.

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

On 08/11/2014 6:01 pm, "Nathan Woodrow" wrote: > > Personally I think we should still do 2.8, LTR it, and then we can do 3.0 for the next release. Couldn't we branch 2.6 off to become a LTR? Nyall ___ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.os

Re: [Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

Personally I think we should still do 2.8, LTR it, and then we can do 3.0 for the next release. Breaking the API again without a LTR in place makes me nervous as the 2.0 API really wasn't that long ago. - Nathan On Sat Nov 08 2014 at 4:11:34 PM Nyall Dawson wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm just wonder

[Qgis-developer] QGIS 3.0?

Hi all, I'm just wondering - given a few large changes coming up, including: - qt5 support, possibly breaking plugins - potential composer redesign, breaking api - geometry rework, where an api break would result in a better foundation moving forward ... is it worth exploring the idea of making t