[Qgis-developer] Resurrecting the RFC (QEP - QGIS Enhancement Proposal)

[Martin Dobias]

On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Nyall Dawson <nyall.dawson at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 23/08/2014 3:33 am, "Even Rouault" <even.rouault at spatialys.com> wrote:
>>
>> Le vendredi 22 août 2014 17:19:34, Marco Hugentobler a écrit :
>> > - Who can vote?
>> >      PSC only (GDAL) / committers
>>
>> With GIT, 'committers' can be anyone. You probably meant folks who have
>> push
>> rights in official repo ? If you give them voting rights, and potentially
>> veto
>> right (not sure how the rules of the voting system of QGIS are), then they
>> are
>> defacto PSC members, since they can steer the direction of the project.
>> Not
>> saying this is bad. Just a consequence.
>>
>
> I'd say neither psc nor commit rights are a good fit. While I agree that the
> psc should definitely have a say, not everyone on the psc is a developer or
> has c++ coding experience. Similarly, we have people who have commit rights
> who are neither developers nor psc members.

I had the same impression as Nyall. PSC is meant to steer direction of
the whole project, not to deal with technical details of
implementations in QEPs - after all, only 3 out of 7 positions are
meant for developers. At the same time I understand that creating
another "developer" committee would make things more complex.


I think that voting on QEPs could be started when the QEP's author has
impression that enough consensus was reached. Most projects also allow
their RFCs to go to 'deferred' state if the proposal is too
controversial.


> Since a big part of the qep would be commenting on proposed technical
> architecture, I think its fairly important that developers have a good say
> in the process. But conversely if the qep process determines the direction
> of QGIS, then non devs on the psc should also have a say.

Originally I thought that only new functionality would be covered by
QEPs, but it is actually quite useful to have one common process for
any significant changes in the project - ranging from development
stuff through infrastructure changes to organizational changes (like
introduction of trademark). So it makes sense to have PSC vote on
QEPs.


Regards
Martin