[QGIS-Developer] Reword "Trusted Plugin" --> "Trusted Plugin Author"?

Fri Sep 8 06:38:01 PDT 2017

Very good idea...

On 8 September 2017 3:16:55 pm Alessandro Pasotti <apasotti at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Werner Macho <werner.macho at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I like Community contributor (more than trusted author)
>> but have another addition
>> Contributor known by the community ..
>> But I think that distracts us from the plugins "tag" that it is.
>>
>> what about "checked" or "scanned" or something like that?
>>
>> regards
>> Werner
>>
>>
>
> That would be untrue: AFAIK nobody really scans the plugins and the
> "trusted" users are the only one that can approve the plugins by themselves.
>
> Please bear in mind that what that flag really means at the application
> level is that a "trusted" user can approve and publish his own plugins, in
> that sense we "trust" him.
>
> So, "trusted" is the correct word, but we could stress the reasons why that
> user has been trusted instead of the condition itself, so, I suggest to add
> a brief sentence/tooltip whatever it works to explain why a user (in
> general: not that particular user) has been flagged as "trusted" (active
> member in the community with a proven record of plugin or core
> contributions etc. etc.).
>
> Kind regards.
>
>
>
>
>> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 2:32 PM, DelazJ <delazj at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Tom, thanks for your input and I'm surprised that you are not a
>>> trusted author (thought that have been discussed a while back).
>>> I was about to propose a pull request this morning with the new
>>> wording but didn't because either "The author of this plugin is
>>> trusted" or "Trusted Author" makes me feel comfortable. It looked to
>>> me that those who do not have this tag are untrusted. And I'm afraid
>>> this could harm their work and they do not deserve that.
>>> So, if the main idea is to promote people that have a community
>>> implication (and I guess we agree they deserve it), how about
>>> "Community contributor"?
>>>
>>> 2017-09-08 14:27 GMT+02:00 Saber Razmjooei
>>> <saber.razmjooei at lutraconsulting.co.uk>:
>>> > +1 for Tom to become a trusted author. In addition to the qgis2web
>>> plugin,
>>> > Tom is a very active in QGIS UK usergroups.
>>> >
>>> > Cheers
>>> > Saber
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 8 September 2017 at 13:17, Luigi Pirelli <luipir at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> +1 to thrusted author
>>> >>
>>> >> side +1 to trust Tom... can we use the same OSGeo charters memeber
>>> >> mechanism to nominate thrusted authors?
>>> >> Luigi Pirelli
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> ************************************************************
>>> **************************************
>>> >> * Boundless QGIS Support/Development: lpirelli AT boundlessgeo DOT com
>>> >> * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/luigipirelli
>>> >> * Stackexchange: http://gis.stackexchange.com/u
>>> sers/19667/luigi-pirelli
>>> >> * GitHub: https://github.com/luipir
>>> >> * Mastering QGIS 2nd Edition:
>>> >> *
>>> >> https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/
>>> mastering-qgis-second-edition
>>> >>
>>> >> ************************************************************
>>> **************************************
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On 8 September 2017 at 13:45, Matthias Kuhn <matthias at opengis.ch>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> > Hi Tom,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I understand this sentiment very well. Do you think formalizing the
>>> >> > process to become a "Trusted Author" and making it more transparent
>>> >> > would help here?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Your statement does not seems not to critizise the move of switching
>>> >> > trust from plugins to authors. But more the "in-or-out" in general.
>>> >> > Important here is, that the idea is to put more stress on the "in"
>>> >> > rather than the "out" (by saying "trusted author" rather than
>>> "untrusted
>>> >> > author"). If you have an idea how this can be made even more
>>> visible, I
>>> >> > think there's a good chance that we can mitigate unwanted
>>> side-effects
>>> >> > and potentially hard feelings of this better.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Sidnote:
>>> >> > I will immediately vote to make you a trusted author, we all very
>>> well
>>> >> > know the work you've put into qgis2web and close relations with the
>>> >> > community. While I think you should get the label anyway, I think
>>> >> > there's a different discussion you wanted to trigger here.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Matthias
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On 09/08/2017 01:29 PM, Tom Chadwin wrote:
>>> >> >> So it's not that you don't trust my work, it's that you don't trust
>>> me?
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> As an untrusted plugin author, I should say that this makes little
>>> >> >> difference. While I 100% understand the rationale behind this
>>> process,
>>> >> >> it
>>> >> >> still feels like a bit of a slap in the face. Perhaps the use of the
>>> >> >> word
>>> >> >> "trust", be it applied to plugin or author, is too loaded for me. In
>>> >> >> fact,
>>> >> >> transferring the usage to individuals makes it more galling - it's
>>> one
>>> >> >> thing
>>> >> >> for the work I have done voluntarily over the past three or four
>>> years
>>> >> >> not
>>> >> >> to be trusted by the core devs, but it's quite another for me,
>>> >> >> personally,
>>> >> >> not to be trusted.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> I of course understand that the inference is not that I and my work
>>> are
>>> >> >> not
>>> >> >> trusted. I simply worded that last sentence deliberately to make the
>>> >> >> point
>>> >> >> that this label, and its absence, seems arbitrary at best, possibly
>>> >> >> reinforces the (otherwise seldom apparent) clique nature of devs in
>>> >> >> general
>>> >> >> and the QGIS core devs in particular, and at worst is insulting.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Hope you understand - I feel the point had to be made.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Thanks
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Tom
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> -----
>>> >> >> Buy Pie Spy: Adventures in British pastry 2010-11 on Amazon
>>> >> >> --
>>> >> >> Sent from:
>>> >> >> http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/QGIS-Developer-f4099106.html
>>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> >> QGIS-Developer mailing list
>>> >> >> QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
>>> >> >> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>> >> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailma
>>> n/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>> >> >>
>>> >> > _______________________________________________
>>> >> > QGIS-Developer mailing list
>>> >> > QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
>>> >> > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>> >> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>> >> QGIS-Developer mailing list
>>> >> QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
>>> >> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Saber Razmjooei
>>> > www.lutraconsulting.co.uk
>>> > +44 (0)7568 129733
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > QGIS-Developer mailing list
>>> > QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
>>> > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> QGIS-Developer mailing list
>>> QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
>>> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> QGIS-Developer mailing list
>> QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Alessandro Pasotti
> w3:   www.itopen.it
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20170908/db60ba60/attachment.html>