[QGIS-Developer] 32 by 3.2?

[Nyall Dawson]

On 8 May 2018 at 14:39, James Shaeffer <james at shaeffer.co> wrote:
> I personally like this strategy, but as someone who is new to the project
> and has made only one PR (which was merged rather quickly), how can I help?
>
> This seems to really only concern those who maintain the code, leaving many
> unable to do much.

Unfortunately that's true - it really comes down to current
maintainers and anyone with an open, unmerged PR to assist.

But, of course, new contributions are ALWAYS welcome :D

Nyall

> --
> James
>
> On May 7, 2018 4:15:59 PM MST, Nyall Dawson <nyall.dawson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> It's no surprise to anyone familiar with the QGIS project that we've
>> got an issue with the Pull Request queue. It's been slowly growing
>> over time, recently hitting over 150 open requests! It's a bit of an
>> embarrassment to the project (some of these PRs have been open for
>> years!), and is likely causing us to lose new contributors and code.
>>
>> The usual magic QGIS coding pixies did some work lately and squashed
>> the queue back below 100 requests. But the remaining ones are all the
>> difficult, unfinished or orphaned PRs...
>>
>> PR reviewing is hard. Not everyone can review every open PR due to
>> different familiarity with areas of the codebase. (Which is why I
>> don't think a funding grant to cover this will ever work
>> successfully). And no-one wants to be the 'bad guy" who closes an
>> unmerged PR representing someone else's hard work.
>>
>> So I propose a "32 by 3.2" sprint, where we ALL collaboratively aim to
>> reduce the PR queue to <32 open requests before 3.2 release.
>>
>> I think we could achieve this by:
>>
>> 1. Adopting a hard-line approach to the older, orphaned PRs. Even if
>> they have some value or reflect real issues, if no-one is interested
>> in cleaning up the request to get it merge ready then we close it.
>>
>> 2. Adopt a "open-one, close-one" guideline for core committers. Heck,
>> I think every core committer has at least 1 or 2 open PRs representing
>> various experiments and WIP in unfinished states. These should either
>> be finished off, or closed and re-opened when the work is actually
>> ready to go. And for test PRs which are "for comment only" I'd suggest
>> a QEP is more likely to get better feedback and is the more
>> appropriate place for this discussion of this nature.
>>
>> 3. Closing orphaned or risky PRs which are targeted to 2.18 and which
>> have been fixed in master branch.
>>
>> 4. Sharing the hard work so that the magic pixies don't lose their
>> magic powers :)
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Nyall
>> ________________________________
>>
>> 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