Release plans

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
26 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Release plans

Nathan Woodrow
Hi,

With the impending release in the next day or so I would just like to clarify what the current plan is.

1) Are we planning on having packages ready to go before the official announcement?

  Personally I don't think it looks good to have nothing ready for download as soon as the email goes out because word spreads quick, people hit our site, find nothing, get annoyed, then we tell them "ohh but you have to wait until we make packages". A release to us is tagged hash, to users it means packages ready to go.

2) Is the website going to be updated before/just after the announcement to point to the packages?

3) Are we holding the feature freeze for a month/two weeks after release in case something comes up that is a real hurt point to hold off on?  

If 2.4 "release" on the 27 is going to be just a email to call for packages, could it be just labeled as such, don't use the words "Release", or "QGIS 2.4 is out" because it will go everywhere raising the issues in 1).

I guess that is all, if the questions could be clarified that would be great.

Regards,
Nathan  


_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

Kari Salovaara
On 06/26/2014 02:22 PM, Nathan Woodrow wrote:
> Hi,
>
> With the impending release in the next day or so I would just like to
> clarify what the current plan is.
>
> 1) Are we planning on having packages ready to go before the official
> announcement?

It would be quite unfair for us, translators, as we have been promised
that we have time until tomorrow morning. It wouldn't be very motivating
for future.

>
>   Personally I don't think it looks good to have nothing ready for
> download as soon as the email goes out because word spreads quick,
> people hit our site, find nothing, get annoyed, then we tell them "ohh
> but you have to wait until we make packages". A release to us is
> tagged hash, to users it means packages ready to go.
>
> 2) Is the website going to be updated before/just after the
> announcement to point to the packages?
>
> 3) Are we holding the feature freeze for a month/two weeks after
> release in case something comes up that is a real hurt point to hold
> off on?
>
> If 2.4 "release" on the 27 is going to be just a email to call for
> packages, could it be just labeled as such, don't use the words
> "Release", or "QGIS 2.4 is out" because it will go everywhere raising
> the issues in 1).
>
> I guess that is all, if the questions could be clarified that would be
> great.
>
> Regards,
> Nathan
>

Regards,
Kari

--
Kari Salovaara
Hanko, Finland

"Volunteers do not necessarily have the time; they just have the heart."
  ~ Elizabeth Andrew

_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

Jürgen E. Fischer
In reply to this post by Nathan Woodrow
Hi Nathan,

On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 21:22:54 +1000, Nathan Woodrow wrote:
> 1) Are we planning on having packages ready to go before the official
> announcement?

No. Just like with 2.2.


> 2) Is the website going to be updated before/just after the announcement to
>    point to the packages?

When the package arrive the website is going to be updated.  Where necessary,
not all links have an explicit version number in them.  And we should probably
also get rid of those that do - so we don't need to change that just because
the current release version number changed.


> 3) Are we holding the feature freeze for a month/two weeks after release in
>    case something comes up that is a real hurt point to hold off on?

No.  Once the release is branched and tagged, master is open for new features
again.  Just like with 2.2.   Fixes can be applied to the release branch -
although there still isn't an official plan if/when/how such updates would end
up in packages.


> If 2.4 "release" on the 27 is going to be just a email to call for packages,
> could it be just labeled as such, don't use the words "Release", or "QGIS 2.4
> is out" because it will go everywhere raising the issues in 1).

No, just like with 2.2

http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-user/2014-February/026281.html

and as on the roadmap:

http://qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/development/index.html#road-map 


Jürgen

--
Jürgen E. Fischer         norBIT GmbH               Tel. +49-4931-918175-31
Dipl.-Inf. (FH)           Rheinstraße 13            Fax. +49-4931-918175-50
Software Engineer         D-26506 Norden               http://www.norbit.de
QGIS PSC member (RM)      Germany                      IRC: jef on FreeNode                        

--
norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH
Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden
GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502

_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

Nathan Woodrow
>>No. Just like with 2.2.

I think this is a real mistake and bad PR for the project.  If we want to do it like this we need to refine out release plan better to have things line up nice and smooth so people get what they expect.  The user isn't us, we can build from source, they can not, nor should they.

dev cylce -> freeze -> no new strings -> 3 days out (or something) freeze all non package code incl strings -> call packages/update versions/update site code etc -> (on day) push website and packages -> announcement.

I suggest we need a calender on the website that shows using colors and date ranges what is happening and when so no one gets a shock. 

Here is what the current release feels like to a normal user who is coming from the outside:

- Gets notified of the release (took about 10 seconds to go on twitter after you sent the 2.2 email that it was "out" so it was not a hidden thing, even on the weekend)
- Gets excited
- Heads to website
- "Ok banner still say 2.2 but there is a download link"
-  Click download.
- Run installer
- "oh 2.2. Didn't it say 2.4 was out?"
- *check back for later for you packages* "How long do I have to wait?"
- *........ please come again*
- (Never comes back) or is annoyed as heck
- *meanwhile*
- We push master forward, features flow in like normal.
- "Oh hi I found a major bug in 2.4 is there any planned patched release"
- "Meh" 

This is bad PR, even without the patched release thing, a release is a binary release to a user. A source tarball means nothing.

I remember having to respond to a heap of annoyed people on the QGIS twitter/Facebook account with "we are currently building package, please hold"

- Nathan



On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Jürgen E. <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Nathan,

On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 21:22:54 +1000, Nathan Woodrow wrote:
> 1) Are we planning on having packages ready to go before the official
> announcement?

No. Just like with 2.2.


> 2) Is the website going to be updated before/just after the announcement to
>    point to the packages?

When the package arrive the website is going to be updated.  Where necessary,
not all links have an explicit version number in them.  And we should probably
also get rid of those that do - so we don't need to change that just because
the current release version number changed.


> 3) Are we holding the feature freeze for a month/two weeks after release in
>    case something comes up that is a real hurt point to hold off on?

No.  Once the release is branched and tagged, master is open for new features
again.  Just like with 2.2.   Fixes can be applied to the release branch -
although there still isn't an official plan if/when/how such updates would end
up in packages.


> If 2.4 "release" on the 27 is going to be just a email to call for packages,
> could it be just labeled as such, don't use the words "Release", or "QGIS 2.4
> is out" because it will go everywhere raising the issues in 1).

No, just like with 2.2

http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-user/2014-February/026281.html

and as on the roadmap:

http://qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/development/index.html#road-map


Jürgen

--
Jürgen E. Fischer         norBIT GmbH               Tel. +49-4931-918175-31
Dipl.-Inf. (FH)           Rheinstraße 13            Fax. +49-4931-918175-50
Software Engineer         D-26506 Norden               http://www.norbit.de
QGIS PSC member (RM)      Germany                      IRC: jef on FreeNode

--
norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH
Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden
GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502

_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer


_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

macho
In reply to this post by Kari Salovaara
The close for translations pulled in is tomorrow at 11:30 UTC..
No changes in that.. As the source is released at 12:00 as 2.4..
Don't worry.. Your language updates will surely make it..

Regards
Werner


On 26 June 2014 13:34:20 Kari Salovaara <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 06/26/2014 02:22 PM, Nathan Woodrow wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > With the impending release in the next day or so I would just like to
> clarify what the current plan is.
> >
> > 1) Are we planning on having packages ready to go before the official
> announcement?
>
> It would be quite unfair for us, translators, as we have been promised that
> we have time until tomorrow morning. It wouldn't be very motivating for future.
> >
> >   Personally I don't think it looks good to have nothing ready for >
> download as soon as the email goes out because word spreads quick, > people
> hit our site, find nothing, get annoyed, then we tell them "ohh > but you
> have to wait until we make packages". A release to us is > tagged hash, to
> users it means packages ready to go.
> >
> > 2) Is the website going to be updated before/just after the announcement
> to point to the packages?
> >
> > 3) Are we holding the feature freeze for a month/two weeks after release
> in case something comes up that is a real hurt point to hold off on?
> >
> > If 2.4 "release" on the 27 is going to be just a email to call for
> packages, could it be just labeled as such, don't use the words "Release",
> or "QGIS 2.4 is out" because it will go everywhere raising the issues in 1).
> >
> > I guess that is all, if the questions could be clarified that would be great.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Nathan
> >
>
> Regards,
> Kari
>
> --
> Kari Salovaara
> Hanko, Finland
>
> "Volunteers do not necessarily have the time; they just have the heart."
>   ~ Elizabeth Andrew
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer


_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

Jürgen E. Fischer
In reply to this post by Nathan Woodrow
Hi Nathan,

[Take 25]

On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 22:32:01 +1000, Nathan Woodrow wrote:
> >>No. Just like with 2.2.
 
> I think this is a real mistake and bad PR for the project.  If we want to
> do it like this we need to refine out release plan better to have things
> line up nice and smooth so people get what they expect.

Why again a discussion on the last minute?  "The plans has been on display..."

The road map tells users what to expect.  The announcement told users what to
expect.   If they still expect something else, that's their choice.  But IMHO
it's nothing that we need to take responsibility for.

The current plan is easy. Just two dates: freeze and release.   development
before the freeze, testing, fixing, translating, release preparations after the
freeze, packaging and new the next development cycle starts in parallel after
the release.

I think that's easy enough even without a colorful layout.   Although the
roadmap is hard to find on the website (but it's nowhere near alpha centauri).


> The user isn't us, we can build from source, they can not, nor should they.

BTW the users are free to build from source, that's their choice, too.  I think
most of our users are pretty smart (and good looking) ;)


Jürgen


PS: "This must be Thursday" - and I put release on fridays intentionally to
    have the weekend for packaging...
PPS: I wanted to tackle #10703 instead of this - you could have done #10589 ;)

--
Jürgen E. Fischer         norBIT GmbH               Tel. +49-4931-918175-31
Dipl.-Inf. (FH)           Rheinstraße 13            Fax. +49-4931-918175-50
Software Engineer         D-26506 Norden               http://www.norbit.de
QGIS PSC member (RM)      Germany                      IRC: jef on FreeNode                        

--
norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH
Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden
GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502

_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

3nids

On 26.06.2014 16:07, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote:

> Hi Nathan,
>
> [Take 25]
>
> On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 22:32:01 +1000, Nathan Woodrow wrote:
>>>> No. Just like with 2.2.
>  
>> I think this is a real mistake and bad PR for the project.  If we want to
>> do it like this we need to refine out release plan better to have things
>> line up nice and smooth so people get what they expect.
> Why again a discussion on the last minute?  "The plans has been on display..."
>
> The road map tells users what to expect.  The announcement told users what to
> expect.   If they still expect something else, that's their choice.  But IMHO
> it's nothing that we need to take responsibility for.
>
> The current plan is easy. Just two dates: freeze and release.   development
> before the freeze, testing, fixing, translating, release preparations after the
> freeze, packaging and new the next development cycle starts in parallel after
> the release.
>
> I think that's easy enough even without a colorful layout.   Although the
> roadmap is hard to find on the website (but it's nowhere near alpha centauri).
>
>
>> The user isn't us, we can build from source, they can not, nor should they.
> BTW the users are free to build from source, that's their choice, too.  I think
> most of our users are pretty smart (and good looking) ;)
I would bet that most people building from sources are not the ones
waiting for an announced release.

I agree with Nathan that it's a real bad idea to announce a release if
people can't use it.
If packaging is done during the weekend, I don't see a real problem to
wait two days before annoucement.
I would say that having the windows packages ready is a minimum before
annoucement.

Although, I agree it's a pity that we discuss 1 day to annoucement.
This should be polished for next time, and I would vote for a more
detailed calendar with
* Feature freeze
* String freeze
* Code + Translation freeze
* Packaging (at least win)
* Release

Cheers,

Denis


>
>
> Jürgen
>
>
> PS: "This must be Thursday" - and I put release on fridays intentionally to
>      have the weekend for packaging...
> PPS: I wanted to tackle #10703 instead of this - you could have done #10589 ;)
>

_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

Andreas Neumann-4
In reply to this post by Nathan Woodrow
Hi

I have to agree with Nathan and Denis. It would me buch better to
announce a release when the packages are ready. I remember that last
time there was some confusion and disappointment by users reading tweets
that QGIS was available and then they could not install it on their
platform.

Sorry Jürgen that we discuss this at the very latest. I was already
happy that we got one week more time for testing/bug fixing.

At least for the next release we should have packages ready before the
announcement. Or only inform developers about the release and then the
regular users when the packages are ready.

Andreas

PS: hope Jürgen does not hate me now for all my requests/ideas ...

Am 26.06.2014 12:32, schrieb Nathan Woodrow:

>>> No. Just like with 2.2.
>
> I think this is a real mistake and bad PR for the project.  If we want to
> do it like this we need to refine out release plan better to have things
> line up nice and smooth so people get what they expect.  The user isn't us,
> we can build from source, they can not, nor should they.
>
> dev cylce -> freeze -> no new strings -> 3 days out (or something) freeze
> all non package code incl strings -> call packages/update versions/update
> site code etc -> (on day) push website and packages -> announcement.
>
> I suggest we need a calender on the website that shows using colors and
> date ranges what is happening and when so no one gets a shock.
>
> Here is what the current release feels like to a normal user who is coming
> from the outside:
>
> - Gets notified of the release (took about 10 seconds to go on twitter
> after you sent the 2.2 email that it was "out" so it was not a hidden
> thing, even on the weekend)
> - Gets excited
> - Heads to website
> - "Ok banner still say 2.2 but there is a download link"
> -  Click download.
> - Run installer
> - "oh 2.2. Didn't it say 2.4 was out?"
> - *check back for later for you packages* "How long do I have to wait?"
> - *........ please come again*
> - (Never comes back) or is annoyed as heck
> - *meanwhile*
> - We push master forward, features flow in like normal.
> - "Oh hi I found a major bug in 2.4 is there any planned patched release"
> - "Meh"
>
> This is bad PR, even without the patched release thing, a release is a
> binary release to a user. A source tarball means nothing.
>
> I remember having to respond to a heap of annoyed people on the QGIS
> twitter/Facebook account with "we are currently building package, please
> hold"
>
> - Nathan
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Jürgen E. <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Nathan,
>>
>> On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 21:22:54 +1000, Nathan Woodrow wrote:
>>> 1) Are we planning on having packages ready to go before the official
>>> announcement?
>>
>> No. Just like with 2.2.
>>
>>
>>> 2) Is the website going to be updated before/just after the announcement
>> to
>>>    point to the packages?
>>
>> When the package arrive the website is going to be updated.  Where
>> necessary,
>> not all links have an explicit version number in them.  And we should
>> probably
>> also get rid of those that do - so we don't need to change that just
>> because
>> the current release version number changed.
>>
>>
>>> 3) Are we holding the feature freeze for a month/two weeks after release
>> in
>>>    case something comes up that is a real hurt point to hold off on?
>>
>> No.  Once the release is branched and tagged, master is open for new
>> features
>> again.  Just like with 2.2.   Fixes can be applied to the release branch -
>> although there still isn't an official plan if/when/how such updates would
>> end
>> up in packages.
>>
>>
>>> If 2.4 "release" on the 27 is going to be just a email to call for
>> packages,
>>> could it be just labeled as such, don't use the words "Release", or
>> "QGIS 2.4
>>> is out" because it will go everywhere raising the issues in 1).
>>
>> No, just like with 2.2
>>
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-user/2014-February/026281.html
>>
>> and as on the roadmap:
>>
>> http://qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/development/index.html#road-map
>>
>>
>> Jürgen
>>
>> --
>> Jürgen E. Fischer         norBIT GmbH               Tel. +49-4931-918175-31
>> Dipl.-Inf. (FH)           Rheinstraße 13            Fax. +49-4931-918175-50
>> Software Engineer         D-26506 Norden
>> http://www.norbit.de
>> QGIS PSC member (RM)      Germany                      IRC: jef on FreeNode
>>
>> --
>> norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH
>> Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden
>> GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qgis-developer mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>

_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

Jürgen E. Fischer
Hi Andreas,

On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 14:43:19 +0000, Andreas Neumann wrote:
> I have to agree with Nathan and Denis. It would me buch better to announce a
> release when the packages are ready. I remember that last time there was some
> confusion and disappointment by users reading tweets that QGIS was available
> and then they could not install it on their platform.

That was the first time - it might have come unexpected to the user.  They'll
probably get used to it.

> Sorry Jürgen that we discuss this at the very latest. I was already happy
> that we got one week more time for testing/bug fixing.
 
> At least for the next release we should have packages ready before the
> announcement. Or only inform developers about the release and then the
> regular users when the packages are ready.

Which packages?  OSGeo4W? Windows standalone? Debian? Ubuntu? Ubuntugis?
Fedora?  RHEL/CentOS/SL?  OpenSUSE, Mandriva? Slackware? ArchLinux? OSX?
FreeBSD?  Android?  All?  Some/which?  How long do we wait?

I rather get the (source) release done, get my packages done (a good share of
the above) and then get back to master...


Jürgen

--
Jürgen E. Fischer         norBIT GmbH               Tel. +49-4931-918175-31
Dipl.-Inf. (FH)           Rheinstraße 13            Fax. +49-4931-918175-50
Software Engineer         D-26506 Norden               http://www.norbit.de
QGIS PSC member (RM)      Germany                      IRC: jef on FreeNode                        

--
norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH
Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden
GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502

_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

giohappy
In reply to this post by Andreas Neumann-4
I agree too for announcing when packages are ready. 
Right today, during a course, I was answering a partecipant wh asked be about the next release. I've told him it will happen in a few days and I ansewered: "I hope they don't do as for QGIS 2.2, when we had to go back to the website more and mroe times, hoping to see the QGIS 2.4 download link appear"...

giovanni


2014-06-26 16:43 GMT+02:00 Andreas Neumann <[hidden email]>:
Hi

I have to agree with Nathan and Denis. It would me buch better to
announce a release when the packages are ready. I remember that last
time there was some confusion and disappointment by users reading tweets
that QGIS was available and then they could not install it on their
platform.

Sorry Jürgen that we discuss this at the very latest. I was already
happy that we got one week more time for testing/bug fixing.

At least for the next release we should have packages ready before the
announcement. Or only inform developers about the release and then the
regular users when the packages are ready.

Andreas

PS: hope Jürgen does not hate me now for all my requests/ideas ...

Am <a href="tel:26.06.2014%2012" value="+12606201412">26.06.2014 12:32, schrieb Nathan Woodrow:
>>> No. Just like with 2.2.
>
> I think this is a real mistake and bad PR for the project.  If we want to
> do it like this we need to refine out release plan better to have things
> line up nice and smooth so people get what they expect.  The user isn't us,
> we can build from source, they can not, nor should they.
>
> dev cylce -> freeze -> no new strings -> 3 days out (or something) freeze
> all non package code incl strings -> call packages/update versions/update
> site code etc -> (on day) push website and packages -> announcement.
>
> I suggest we need a calender on the website that shows using colors and
> date ranges what is happening and when so no one gets a shock.
>
> Here is what the current release feels like to a normal user who is coming
> from the outside:
>
> - Gets notified of the release (took about 10 seconds to go on twitter
> after you sent the 2.2 email that it was "out" so it was not a hidden
> thing, even on the weekend)
> - Gets excited
> - Heads to website
> - "Ok banner still say 2.2 but there is a download link"
> -  Click download.
> - Run installer
> - "oh 2.2. Didn't it say 2.4 was out?"
> - *check back for later for you packages* "How long do I have to wait?"
> - *........ please come again*
> - (Never comes back) or is annoyed as heck
> - *meanwhile*
> - We push master forward, features flow in like normal.
> - "Oh hi I found a major bug in 2.4 is there any planned patched release"
> - "Meh"
>
> This is bad PR, even without the patched release thing, a release is a
> binary release to a user. A source tarball means nothing.
>
> I remember having to respond to a heap of annoyed people on the QGIS
> twitter/Facebook account with "we are currently building package, please
> hold"
>
> - Nathan
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 9:58 PM, Jürgen E. <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Nathan,
>>
>> On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 21:22:54 +1000, Nathan Woodrow wrote:
>>> 1) Are we planning on having packages ready to go before the official
>>> announcement?
>>
>> No. Just like with 2.2.
>>
>>
>>> 2) Is the website going to be updated before/just after the announcement
>> to
>>>    point to the packages?
>>
>> When the package arrive the website is going to be updated.  Where
>> necessary,
>> not all links have an explicit version number in them.  And we should
>> probably
>> also get rid of those that do - so we don't need to change that just
>> because
>> the current release version number changed.
>>
>>
>>> 3) Are we holding the feature freeze for a month/two weeks after release
>> in
>>>    case something comes up that is a real hurt point to hold off on?
>>
>> No.  Once the release is branched and tagged, master is open for new
>> features
>> again.  Just like with 2.2.   Fixes can be applied to the release branch -
>> although there still isn't an official plan if/when/how such updates would
>> end
>> up in packages.
>>
>>
>>> If 2.4 "release" on the 27 is going to be just a email to call for
>> packages,
>>> could it be just labeled as such, don't use the words "Release", or
>> "QGIS 2.4
>>> is out" because it will go everywhere raising the issues in 1).
>>
>> No, just like with 2.2
>>
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-user/2014-February/026281.html
>>
>> and as on the roadmap:
>>
>> http://qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/development/index.html#road-map
>>
>>
>> Jürgen
>>
>> --
>> Jürgen E. Fischer         norBIT GmbH               Tel. +49-4931-918175-31
>> Dipl.-Inf. (FH)           Rheinstraße 13            Fax. +49-4931-918175-50
>> Software Engineer         D-26506 Norden
>> http://www.norbit.de
>> QGIS PSC member (RM)      Germany                      IRC: jef on FreeNode
>>
>> --
>> norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH
>> Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden
>> GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qgis-developer mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>

_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer



--

_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

3nids
In reply to this post by Jürgen E. Fischer

On 26.06.2014 17:02, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote:

> Hi Andreas,
>
> On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 14:43:19 +0000, Andreas Neumann wrote:
>> I have to agree with Nathan and Denis. It would me buch better to announce a
>> release when the packages are ready. I remember that last time there was some
>> confusion and disappointment by users reading tweets that QGIS was available
>> and then they could not install it on their platform.
> That was the first time - it might have come unexpected to the user.  They'll
> probably get used to it.
>
>> Sorry Jürgen that we discuss this at the very latest. I was already happy
>> that we got one week more time for testing/bug fixing.
>  
>> At least for the next release we should have packages ready before the
>> announcement. Or only inform developers about the release and then the
>> regular users when the packages are ready.
> Which packages?  OSGeo4W? Windows standalone? Debian? Ubuntu? Ubuntugis?
> Fedora?  RHEL/CentOS/SL?  OpenSUSE, Mandriva? Slackware? ArchLinux? OSX?
> FreeBSD?  Android?  All?  Some/which?  How long do we wait?
As said, I think Windows is the limiting factor.
I am not sure about Mac.
But that would be the only two.

For the rest, a "packaging...coming soon!" message will do the job!
>
> I rather get the (source) release done, get my packages done (a good share of
> the above) and then get back to master...
>
>
> Jürgen
>

_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

Jürgen E. Fischer
In reply to this post by giohappy
Hi Giovanni,

On Thu, 26. Jun 2014 at 17:02:57 +0200, G. Allegri wrote:
> I agree too for announcing when packages are ready.
> Right today, during a course, I was answering a partecipant wh asked be
> about the next release. I've told him it will happen in a few days and I
> ansewered: "I hope they don't do as for QGIS 2.2, when we had to go back to
> the website more and mroe times, hoping to see the QGIS 2.4 download link
> appear"...

Looks like announcing the (source) release on qgis-developer and announcing
individual packages on qgis-user would solve that problem.

I also don't like to have stuff on my queue, that I can't do anything about
than just be patient.   Actually that's exactly why I want the (completion of)
the packaging out of the release schedule.

To me there's not much point in having master frozen, while everyone is just
waiting for packages to be built.


Jürgen

--
Jürgen E. Fischer         norBIT GmbH               Tel. +49-4931-918175-31
Dipl.-Inf. (FH)           Rheinstraße 13            Fax. +49-4931-918175-50
Software Engineer         D-26506 Norden               http://www.norbit.de
QGIS PSC member (RM)      Germany                      IRC: jef on FreeNode                        

--
norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH
Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden
GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502

_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

pcav
Il 26/06/2014 17:27, Jürgen E. Fischer ha scritto:

> Looks like announcing the (source) release on qgis-developer and announcing
> individual packages on qgis-user would solve that problem.

IMHO:

1. do not change anything in the relase schedule just one day before
2. announcements should be clear: (a) QGIS 2.4 is out, wait for packages; (b) package
for {Debian|Ubuntu|whatever} is ready, go and download it from http://...

This should make everyone happy.
I like the idea our users understand more of the work it is being done, and do not
take tha packages for granted.

All the best.
--
Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
Corsi QGIS e PostGIS: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html
_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

Régis Haubourg
Hi All,
I agree with Denis and Nathan on the general idea, and also with Paolo on "don't change things on day before".
 From a user point of view, I can live 2.2 behaviour, since I already have seen what "release" meant for qgis project in 2.2.  But, I think 2.6 should go to a more common definition of "release", ie package release.
 
Do we have download stats of packages to clarify the minimum list of package to include in that release? To me , Windows, Ubuntu and MacOS should be the minimal list. Advanced users of other distros are much more accustomed with compiling process and are probably better understanding the difference between source code and package .

you're doing all great work, don't let the pressure rise ;-).
 Sorry for not having been able to support the final debug, release and translation process that time... Hope I'll find a way to do that in the future.
Régis
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

Nathan Woodrow
In reply to this post by pcav
I am aware it was a late email, I have been busy on non qgis jobs and haven't been able to look side ways.

On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Paolo Cavallini <[hidden email]> wrote:
1. do not change anything in the relase schedule just one day before
2. announcements should be clear: (a) QGIS 2.4 is out, wait for packages; (b) package
for {Debian|Ubuntu|whatever} is ready, go and download it from http://...

1. Surly it's not hard to build the package an two hours or so before the release and have it ready go, even if this a last minute call. As much as it pains people Windows is our biggest user base so they need to be there, followed by Debian, then OS X.  

2) There is no different for a user between a) and b) a "release" is a binary release like I said.  Making it a two stage process is just confusing and annoying to users.  Trying to make people understand the "process" by doing this isn't really right IMO.  Users don't need to care how packages are built or how long it takes, the people that know or need too tend to be involved at the project level anyway. Users just need a package to install on release day, a "source" release is like say "yay release!....But no you can't have it because your just a user you have to wait".

Jürgen, 

Looks like announcing the (source) release on qgis-developer and announcing
individual packages on qgis-user would solve that problem.

This will make no difference, people watch the dev list especially around release time for news. Once you announce any kind of "release", source or not, you have lost the ability to control where it will go and what people expect. Just watch how quick it will hit twitter, and then watch as people get confused why there is no download. It's mainly wording, it's all in the wording.

People really like our software and some are super excited about the release, to not have packages for download really looks bad IMO.

To me there's not much point in having master frozen, while everyone is just
waiting for packages to be built.

That is why I said it would only be a day or so before release, it shouldn't take more then day to build a package for any of the major platforms and update the site. All we would have to do is branch the code a day out, package, release.  If you push something non package related on that last day before the release then it will just have to wait until next release, or a patched release. People can't be pushing fixes last second as that is just dangerous.

That was the first time - it might have come unexpected to the user.  They'll
probably get used to it..   

They shouldn't that is the point I'm making.  We don't expect that with other things.  If I see a new release of Python is out and I go to the site and don't see a binary package it will be a long while before I go back I have other things to be doing.

I rather get the (source) release done, get my packages done (a good share of
the above) and then get back to master...

I understand, just don't call it a "release". Branch it today and call it a "call for packages" (don't use the word "out" or "release"), wait a few days then binary release. You and I know what a source release is, users don't care.  We really need some stats on our user base so we know what platforms are our major target ones.

This raises the question how quickly are you expecting to have major packages done?  If we source release tonight but don't have packages ready by Monday, Tuesday, there is 4 days of people hitting our site with no way to download the packages and this looks really bad.

Why not call for packages today, let people get sorted over the weekend, update the site, release on Monday, Tuesday? 

I know it sounds like a rant, because it kind of is, but I really enjoy working on the project, the package is great, the people are great, but I find this current release process stressful and I'm not one calling the release.  Stressful because I know we have a lot of users who love our stuff but can't get it when we say it's "out".

If you don't want to change it for this release, OK, but I think we need to review it for the next release so everyone is on the same page.  There are are other large projects we can steal the process from.

- Nathan

_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

Sandro Santilli-2
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 09:03:08AM +1000, Nathan Woodrow wrote:

> a "source" release is like say "yay
> release!....But no you can't have it because your just a user you have to
> wait".

You don't have to wait.
You can have it now if you want.

If you decided to give up your freedom for convenience, you can
wait for someone to also bring you a chair and a pillow.

> On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 05:27:20PM +0200, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote:
>> Looks like announcing the (source) release on qgis-developer
>> and announcing individual packages on qgis-user would solve that problem.

Agreed about splitting the announcement, althought I'd also announce
source release on qgis-user. I don't think hiding existance of "sources"
brings any benefit in the users community.

> This will make no difference, people watch the dev list especially around
> release time for news. Once you announce any kind of "release", source or
> not, you have lost the ability to control where it will go and what people
> expect. Just watch how quick it will hit twitter, and then watch as people
> get confused why there is no download. It's mainly wording, it's all in the
> wording.

I agree about wording being important.

Announcing source release should have a link to the source tarball.

Binary releases might even not need to be announced by the qgis team,
as serious package managers conveniently implement those announces with
user popups and the like...

> People really like our software and some are super excited about the
> release, to not have packages for download really looks bad IMO.

There'll be a source package for download, so those that do not need
a binary package don't have to wait to use it. And those that do _build_
binary packages (for systems you may not even know exist) have a way
to download it and build their packages.

> I know we have a lot of users who love our
> stuff but can't get it when we say it's "out".

They _can_ get it, it may just be not yet wrapped the way which is
more comfortable for them. They only need to be informed about what's
available and what not.

It's like saying you can't say "apples are ripe!" because then people get
frustrated by not finding them on their supermarket shelf.

Nature's PSC: people love apples, stop making them fall on the ground !

--strk;

 ()  ASCII ribbon campaign  --  Keep it simple !
 /\  http://strk.keybit.net/rants/ascii_mails.txt 
_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

Nathan Woodrow

On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Sandro Santilli <[hidden email]> wrote:
Announcing source release should have a link to the source tarball.

Binary releases might even not need to be announced by the qgis team,
as serious package managers conveniently implement those announces with
user popups and the like...

If you know what a source tarball is you are not a normal user.  

From the outside, and it doesn't matter who makes the packages, people come to our site to get the installer, if it's not there it looks bad on us.  Saying "just announce the source and let someone else worry about binary" is a disservice to our users.

99% of our users wouldn't even know how to even build QGIS, and why should they, it's not their job.  It is ours, at least not for the major platforms.

It's like saying you can't say "apples are ripe!" because then people get
frustrated by not finding them on their supermarket shelf.

This is incorrect.  The "apples are ripe" is current master after freeze, might be some bugs still but it's pretty good.  A better compare is saying "Extra! We have apples ready to go,....*goes to shop*.tomorrow". We are the shop.

Having dealt with people confused about the release my opinion is this is bad publicity for the project. I'm not just making it up it's from experience and having to deal with it. 

- Nathan 
  

_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

3nids
In reply to this post by Sandro Santilli-2

For me, a summarize is: save two days of waiting (on a 4+ months
schedule) so <1% users can compile while 99% get frustrated.

Why can't we state that release is when windows + mac + ubuntu are ready?

Many reported users get confused.
Last time, people were asking where to find the installer.

Isn't it sufficient proof this schema is not working well?



On 27.06.2014 07:47, Sandro Santilli wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 09:03:08AM +1000, Nathan Woodrow wrote:
>
>> a "source" release is like say "yay
>> release!....But no you can't have it because your just a user you have to
>> wait".
> You don't have to wait.
> You can have it now if you want.
>
> If you decided to give up your freedom for convenience, you can
> wait for someone to also bring you a chair and a pillow.
>
>> On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 05:27:20PM +0200, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote:
>>> Looks like announcing the (source) release on qgis-developer
>>> and announcing individual packages on qgis-user would solve that problem.
> Agreed about splitting the announcement, althought I'd also announce
> source release on qgis-user. I don't think hiding existance of "sources"
> brings any benefit in the users community.
>
>> This will make no difference, people watch the dev list especially around
>> release time for news. Once you announce any kind of "release", source or
>> not, you have lost the ability to control where it will go and what people
>> expect. Just watch how quick it will hit twitter, and then watch as people
>> get confused why there is no download. It's mainly wording, it's all in the
>> wording.
> I agree about wording being important.
>
> Announcing source release should have a link to the source tarball.
>
> Binary releases might even not need to be announced by the qgis team,
> as serious package managers conveniently implement those announces with
> user popups and the like...
>
>> People really like our software and some are super excited about the
>> release, to not have packages for download really looks bad IMO.
> There'll be a source package for download, so those that do not need
> a binary package don't have to wait to use it. And those that do _build_
> binary packages (for systems you may not even know exist) have a way
> to download it and build their packages.
>
>> I know we have a lot of users who love our
>> stuff but can't get it when we say it's "out".
> They _can_ get it, it may just be not yet wrapped the way which is
> more comfortable for them. They only need to be informed about what's
> available and what not.
>
> It's like saying you can't say "apples are ripe!" because then people get
> frustrated by not finding them on their supermarket shelf.
>
> Nature's PSC: people love apples, stop making them fall on the ground !
>
> --strk;
>
>   ()  ASCII ribbon campaign  --  Keep it simple !
>   /\  http://strk.keybit.net/rants/ascii_mails.txt
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

Nyall Dawson


On 27/06/2014 4:35 pm, "Denis Rouzaud" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> For me, a summarize is: save two days of waiting (on a 4+ months schedule) so <1% users can compile while 99% get frustrated.

I suspect the actual fraction of users who compile is much much smaller than this. Maybe 1 in a thousand at most, probably much lower still.

>
> Why can't we state that release is when windows + mac + ubuntu are ready?
>

+1 from me.

Nyall


_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Release plans

giohappy

Probably the keypoint of this discussion are the different point of views on what the dev community consider the final point of a development cycle. Some consider it the source ball and the packaging a plus. Others include the packages themselves (in their mindset).

I don't want to open a discussion on this but I think that a project like QGIS, which is extending its user base, cannot consider that the majority of its users even don't know how a software is made. And I don't blame them, as I don't know the intricacies of the smartphone I'm writing on right know.

If the problem is convincing people to donate to support the complete lifecycle of the project well, this is a different point, but I don't think we will get there hoping they understand what's under the job of releasing a ready to go package...

giovanni

Il 27/giu/2014 08:45 "Nyall Dawson" <[hidden email]> ha scritto:


On 27/06/2014 4:35 pm, "Denis Rouzaud" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> For me, a summarize is: save two days of waiting (on a 4+ months schedule) so <1% users can compile while 99% get frustrated.

I suspect the actual fraction of users who compile is much much smaller than this. Maybe 1 in a thousand at most, probably much lower still.

>
> Why can't we state that release is when windows + mac + ubuntu are ready?
>

+1 from me.

Nyall


_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
12