[Qgis-developer] Project quality discussion

[Nathan Woodrow]

The main problem I see in having a formal pay to review/merge model, no
matter the scale, is that it is a pay to win model no matter how to goes.
If you have the money you can pay someone to push it though quicker which
doesn't give others the same ability if they don't have the cash.

Personally the only way I can see this model working is if we have a full
time dev for the project that can review most PRs, or the QGIS.ORG board
can allocate funds to a core dev to review a set of PRs. This way the
project is in control and not "Hey X, I have a stack of cash here. Be a
buddy and merge my stuff for me will ya"

I am streamlining the QEP process so that the whole think is quicker and
faster to do.

- Nathan


On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 9:53 PM, Hugo Mercier <hugo.mercier at oslandia.com>
wrote:

> On 09/11/2015 12:23, Alessandro Pasotti wrote:
> > 2015-11-09 11:52 GMT+01:00 Nyall Dawson <nyall.dawson at gmail.com
> > <mailto:nyall.dawson at gmail.com>>:
> >
>
> >
> >     The way I read this is that THEY would have to pay for their
> >     contribution to be reviewed.
> >
> >     Nyall
> >
> >
> >
> > Only if nobody volunteers to review that for free.
>
>
> Yes. Or to put it differently: only if THEY want a guarantee on
> acceptability / decision delay
>
>
> >
> > To address 2, the QGIS.ORG <http://QGIS.ORG> will ask if somebody is
> > volunteering to review the code in a certain time (and keep the money
> > for the project in that case) an hire a core dev to do the code review
> > in case no one is available (still keeping part of the money for the
> > internal expenses).
> >
>
> I agree. But I am pretty sure if it is known there is money for a
> review, nobody would like to review it for free (and it would make
> sense). So I am not sure about the first part of your "if" :)
>
> I also think it could generalize to QEP reviews as well.
>
> > This is not killing voluntary work, provides some additional funds for
> > QGIS.ORG <http://QGIS.ORG>, reward core devs (and feeds their children)
> > and moreover guarantee certain times and a clear and transparent path
> > for new features approval process to not-core devs.
>
> +1
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20151110/60921098/attachment.html>