<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Hi all, <br>
</p>
<p>I would go in favor of a fixed budget too, because when things
are not fixed in advance, I saw in my previous work how customer's
projects tend to take over long term tasks, even if they are
funded. <br>
</p>
<p>A fixed budget helps clarifying plannings. That's however not the
magical solution. <br>
</p>
<p>One point that came to my mind, looking at the pull requests :
Should we treat code review of community work the same way as
enterprise funded work? <br>
</p>
<p>My point is that review costs should be included in commercial
activities and not relying on QGIS's community donations to
fullfill the QA process.</p>
<p>Community's work however, which is the best way to welcome new
long term contributors, should not lack behind because all dev's
have a lot of commercial contracts or need to focus on family /
house building sometimes </p>
<p>I feel this is the current situation, correct me if I'm wrong. <br>
</p>
<p>That said being able to tell if the pull request is originated by
volunteers or not, is a gray zone. When it comes to contract
within the network of our friendly commercial companies,
developers know themselves enough to be able to tell. <br>
</p>
<p>When it is a case like, let's say Amazon's PR, it is easy to tell
also.</p>
<p>But what about new contributors investing in the own efforts,
still working in a big company or local authority ? I am afraid
this is a grey zone we never will be able to clarify formally and
we maybe should use nudging more than strict rules there. <br>
</p>
<p>What about modifying the current pull request template from <i><br>
</i></p>
<p><i>' Reviewing is a process done by project maintainers, mostly
on a volunteer basis. We try to keep the overhead as small as
possible and appreciate if you help us to do so by checking the
following list. [..] "</i><br>
</p>
<p>to <br>
</p>
<p><i>"</i><i> Thanks a lot for submitting this proposal ! </i><i>QGIS.org
is a non profit organization that uses donations a membership
fees to fund part of the code reviews and bug fixing efforts. A
lot of this effort is done on a volunteer basis by project
maintainenrs.</i></p>
<p><i> If your company is making profits, or saving lots of licence
fees using QGIS, sponsoring QGIS's project and hiring directly a
QGIS core developer can help a lot in speeding up the review
process. <br>
</i></p>
<p><i>Community members, you're more than welcome to propose code
changes, we're doing our best to review you're proposal, but we
are sometimes a bit flooded :) "</i></p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Regards</p>
<p>Régis<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 13/12/2023 09:00, Alessandro Pasotti
via QGIS-PSC wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAL5Q67049kTS0+rmD1x2-S-HB706N+MbUt9PCD01rN4BBUvwEw@mail.gmail.com">I
would really like to hear what other core devs think about this
proposal though, I only spoke with a few of them.</blockquote>
<div id="grammalecte_menu_main_button_shadow_host"
style="width: 0px; height: 0px;"></div>
</body>
</html>