Remove DB2 provider #40930
Remove DB2 provider #40930
Conversation
rouault
force-pushed
the
remove_db2
branch
2 times, most recently
from
cf4c8ed
to
4e23455
Compare
|
As much as I'd love to, I don't think we can do this without any warning to users. We should first create a qep and then put out a notice in the news feed to get feedback from users. |
how can I do that ? |
For consistency and pretty much the same reasons as qgis/QGIS#40930
|
Tagging as "not for merge", pending outcome of qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals#204 |
Ask on the PSC list |
|
I don't think it is right that DB2 has been removed without any discussion. |
@dwadler this PR has not been merged. |
OK - I was just looking at the commit - which hasn't been merged. |
|
Could it be made 'optional' such as moving it to a plugin? |
Such driver would certainly a perfect fit for a plugin (like the HANA one which shouldn't have made its way to core), and if the plugin architecture isn't fit, the contribution should be to improve it. No need to clutter the UI and code base with something that is only marginally used. QGIS should be careful not becoming the kitchen sink that GDAL is (one could argue that GDAL mission is to be a kitchen sink, but I'm starting to question this). |
rouault
force-pushed
the
remove_db2
branch
2 times, most recently
from
cafa889
to
e5a451a
Compare
|
I haven't looked at the plug-in architecture enough to know whether and how it would work with a database source provider. |
QGIS just got a new proprietary-based provider, so for balance, let's get rid of an existing one. The original committer of the DB2 provider hasn't been active for more than 2 years, and all activity in the provider since then has been, as far as I can see, forced maintenance, due to changes elsewhere in the code base. https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/issues?q=is%3Aissue+db2 shows that only one ticket has been created specifically regarding the DB2 provider. This is either a sign it is of the highest quality, but more realisticly than hardly anybody is using it, otherwise there would be feature requests regarding it. I don't see IBM as a sustaining member of QGIS.org, so it is hard to justify maintenance costs due to it.
|
Following #41178, let's close this as we've effectively removed the provider for most users anyway. Then in 3.20/.22 we can revisit a complete removal. |
QGIS just got a new proprietary-based provider, so for balance, let's get rid of
an existing one.
The original committer of the DB2 provider hasn't been active for more than 2 years,
and all activity in the provider since then has been, as far as I can see,
forced maintenance, due to changes elsewhere in the code base.
https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/issues?q=is%3Aissue+db2 shows that only one ticket
has been created specifically regarding the DB2 provider. This is either a sign
it is of the highest quality, but more realisticly than hardly anybody is using it,
otherwise there would be feature requests regarding it.
I don't see IBM as a sustaining member of QGIS.org, so it is hard to justify
maintenance costs due to it.