[Qgis-developer] Project quality discussion

[Nathan Woodrow]

I agree with Nyall. It should not turn into a pay to win model.

On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Nyall Dawson <nyall.dawson at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On 7 Nov 2015 12:22 AM, "Hugo Mercier" <hugo.mercier at oslandia.com> wrote:
>
> > - 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.
>
> In general I like the way this discussion is going. But I disagree
> strongly with this point. It effectively kills off any contributions from
> organisations/individuals who want to contribute via code but can't
> contribute financially (eg universities, etc). We don't want to lose that.
>
> It also means the entire project becomes 100% dependant on financing. At
> the moment a huge chunk (probably the majority) of QGIS work is volunteer
> or via non-funded contributions.
>
> Couldn't this just be worked out by sponsored devs/companies on a case by
> case basis? Eg if timing is critical then line up a reviewer for speedy
> review prior to quoting for work and factor into their original quote the
> cost for this.
>
> Nyall
>
> >
> > - 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20151107/e53ea7ad/attachment.html>