[Qgis-developer] Project quality discussion

[Yves Jacolin]

Hugo,

This is mainly focus on development of new features but we can add 
documentation and translation in the same way :)

Does new feature shold imply documentation?

Y.
On Friday, November 06, 2015 13:21:53 Hugo Mercier wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> We had a discussion here in Las Palmas about the overall quality of the
> project.
> 
> The main concerns / questions (I had) were:
> 
> - big organizations are starting to fund QGIS. This is great but it is
> still a bit hard for a company to sell the development of a new feature,
> because it is hard to guarantee it will be integrated.
> 
> - we still rely too much on volunteer work. And the situation becomes
> complicated when a paid development depends on volunteer work.
> 
> These are my main conclusions.
> For people who attended, don't hesitate to complete if necessary. For
> the others, you are welcome to react of course.
> 
> - every new feature introduced by a core developer should be sent as a
> Pull Request first. With a given "quarantine" delay after which the PR
> will be merged, even if no reaction. It will allow to share information
> and react in case of problems (and encourage people for good work as well :)
> -> should I create a QEP for that ?
> 
> - if a company with no core developer wants to ensure a new feature is
> accepted, it should pay another core developer for the reviewing part.
> Ideally the money should go to the project and the project would decide
> what core developer(s) to pay.
> The details of this process are not very clear. It still has to be
> discussed. But the goal is to make clear for everyone that if you want
> guarantee: you have to pay for it and there is a clear process to handle
> that.
> 
> - writing a QEP before adding a new feature is a good way to increase
> its acceptance. But some people have to review it. We may come to the
> same process to pay for QEP reviews.
> 
> - at which point we rely on volunteer work is not yet clear. But the
> current guess is: still too much. Having a better idea of the ratio
> between free work and paid work would be profitable for the project: it
> would allow to make clear what the reality of an open source project
> like QGIS is and that too much free work is not sustainable. Paolo's
> mail is about that. The goal is to (begin to) separate clearly what is
> the part of free work and the part of paid work in the project.
> 
> - see on the PSC side if it is possible to pay some people to handle
> global maintenance : PR triage, reviews, small bug fixes and so on. It
> does not have to be only one developer.
> 
> Thanks for participating in this discussion.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer