[Qgis-psc] Paid doc reviewers campaign for QGIS 3.0 ?

[Yves Jacolin]

Harrissou,

Do you have some name in mind? We can contact them rather waiting for
someone to ask funding. You can be interested?

Usually I work on documentation during QGIS hackfest, but I can't go the
next one and haven't been in the previous one either.

Regards,

Y.


Le 02/02/2018 à 13:49, DelazJ a écrit :
> Hi PSC,
>
> This is a follow-up to the silence that answers my (in doc repo) and
> Matteo's recent call for reviewers [0] for the Processing docs he's
> been writing for some months now, and more generally for the docs.
> While we are all eager and happy to show what we've done with QGIS
> 3.0, i'm less proud of the documentation state. There's a lot to do
> but I wouldn't want to expand here on the subject; i have already made
> it repeatedly, here and there and when required, PSC has tried things.
> But give a look to the recent activity in the docs repo and you'll
> maybe get what I mean.
>
> Anyway, this mail is just to ask the PSC to please put on the monday
> meeting agenda discussion of an allocation (if i'm not wrong, QGIS
> Docs has some budget) for paid writers and reviewers for QGIS 3.0
> (good after the bug fix!). Maybe that will attract other people who in
> turn will take on this task for a while.
>
> [0]
> http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Qgis-community-team-Call-for-PRs-review-td5352089.html
>
> Regards,
> Harrissou
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc

-- 
http://yjacolin.gloobe.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20180202/8c35a4a2/attachment.html>