[QGIS-Developer] A plea: "fixes" vs "features"

[Paolo Cavallini]

Hi all,
I understand the frustration from both sides. Roughly, our users mostly demand more stability, whereas customers mostly pay for new features. We have balanced this using QGIS.ORG budget, by having more tests, but obviously we can't cover all. I'm pretty sure over time things will keep on improving.
What is new to me is the growing tension.  I think we can and should do something to recover our friendly environment.
All the best.

On 2 August 2019 00:39:33 CEST, Nyall Dawson <nyall.dawson at gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi list,
>
>This is something which has been on my mind a lot lately. Whenever a
>question comes up about regressions or stability, the argument is
>often thrown around that developers are writing "fun new features, not
>fixes".
>
>I personally think this argument is a red herring. At best, it's a
>misleading argument. At worst, it's side-tracking difficult and
>important discussions with a point which has no corroborating
>evidence, and offending contributors to the project.
>
>Has anyone actually tested this argument? My gut feeling is that it
>would not hold up to any form of statistical testing in any way, and
>that the mutually exclusive choice between writing a feature or a fix
>NEVER comes up in reality.
>
>Can we PLEASE drop this argument, at least until someone does a survey
>targeting the developers behind feature PRs, e.g.
>
>"
>If you weren't spending time writing this feature, would you have
>instead:
>
>[ ] Just done my original task using alternative software or lengthy
>workarounds instead, knowing that I'll have to repeat those
>workarounds in future tasks
>
>[ ] Ignored the issues with my mapping product caused by the missing
>feature and supplied it to clients as is
>
>[ ] Gone to bed early, and got a good night's sleep
>
>[ ] Gone for a hike in the mountains, re-invigorating my soul with the
>beauty of nature
>
>[ ] Thought about going for a hike, but spent the time scrolling
>endlessly through Twitter and feeling guilty and lazy
>
>[ ] I was being paid to work on this feature only, and would not have
>been contributing to the project in any alternative way instead
>
>[ ] I had a mutually exclusive choice between writing this feature or
>fixing bugs, and I explicitly choose to write a feature instead
>because it was more enjoyable.
>"
>
>Until we have evidence that this argument is valid, I think it's
>actually causing much more harm to the community than good. (It can
>easily be mis-interpreted as "you wasted your time volunteering this
>contribution, you should have fixed #xyz instead.")
>
>Thanks for the consideration!
>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

-- 
Sorry for being short
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20190802/7d8481e4/attachment-0001.html>