[QGIS-Developer] grant proposal

[Denis Rouzaud]

Indeed going a bit crazy ;)

Looking at the document mentioned in the thread [0], it would be good if we
could at least get the QEP requirement written in stone.

For the rest, I am a bit puzzled on the solutions. Maybe having only QEP
already accepted would be an option, although being other issues such as
timing for review.

Cheers,
Denis


[0]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CNmSJxztrHrqLfillDH8v1zWaMzxFUyYSPT3sut55eQ/edit

Le mar. 25 juin 2019 à 10:59, Nyall Dawson <nyall.dawson at gmail.com> a
écrit :

> On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 17:46, DelazJ <delazj at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > For the record,
> http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Grant-application-suggestions-for-next-time-td5368078.html
> from last year
>
> Oh good - thought I was going crazy with deja vu here. Turns out it's
> just Denis who's going crazy ;)
>
> Nyall
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Harrissou
> >
> > Le mar. 25 juin 2019 à 09:38, Alessandro Pasotti <apasotti at gmail.com> a
> écrit :
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:33 AM Denis Rouzaud <denis.rouzaud at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to share my concern about the grant proposal and voting
> process. I believe we have some serious weaknesses in this process, but
> sadly I don't have perfect solutions to propose.
> >>>
> >>> First, I felt not completely honest while voting: I had 2 proposals
> and one of my colleagues had another one. Can I be neutral and objective?
> Probably not.
> >>> The only solution which came to my mind is to prevent people from
> voting on their own or voting at all if they anything submitted. But
> looking at the people actually writing the proposals, it would be a
> non-sense to prevent them from voting as they are the most aware of the
> QGIS core code.
> >>>
> >>> It made me think of how voting modifications of the constitution
> happens in Switzerland: the executive is sending out voting
> recommendations. This could be an approach, that someone (PSC? a dedicated
> group?) gives a technical advice on the proposals. But here again, it might
> be difficult to be objective and mostly politically quite risky.
> >>>
> >>> This brings me to another issue: some proposal don't leave room for
> technical discussion. On this part, I think that we should make writing a
> QEP mandatory as it should be the place to discuss the proposal and to
> raise concerns. What happens if a grant proposal is accepted but not its
> implementation?
> >>
> >>
> >> Denis,
> >>
> >> I second this last proposal.
> >>
> >> Thanks for raising the issue.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Alessandro Pasotti
> >> w3:   www.itopen.it
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20190625/dbbfa5b1/attachment.html>