[QGIS-Developer] Call for Grant Proposals 2025

[Anita Graser]

Hi Nyall,

Thanks for your thoughts on this. I appreciate the intent behind your
suggestion, but I don’t see a huge advantage in adding the extra step of
contributor voting before community ranking.

In my opinion, if serious concerns are raised during the discussion
period, we / the PSC can already decide to remove the proposal at that
stage—no additional contributor voting needed. This keeps the process
streamlined while still ensuring that technically unfeasible proposals
don’t move forward.

Happy to hear others’ thoughts on this!

Regards,

Anita


On 2025-02-23 23:13, Nyall Dawson wrote:
> Hi Anita, PSC!
>
> > Our previous rounds of grant proposals have been a great success. We are
> > very pleased to announce that this year’s round of grants is now
> > available. The call is open to anybody who wants to make a funded
> > contribution to QGIS, subject to the call conditions outlined in the
> > application form. The deadline for this round is on Tuesday 2025-03-26.
> >
> > For more details, please read:
> > http://blog.qgis.org/qgis-grants-10-call-for-grant-proposals-2025
>
> Thanks for offering this opportunity once again, and for the hard work
> you do in making this happen!
>
> I was wondering if we could make a small change to the process for
> submission going forward. Specifically, now that we're requiring that
> all QEP proposals go through a formal contributor voting and
> acceptance process (instead of the old "no comments means implicit
> acceptance" approach), I think the grant process should also take this
> into consideration and require that the associated QEPs have been
> voted on by contributors and accepted BEFORE they get put out to the
> community voting members for ranking.
>
> Otherwise we could have the awkward situation where a grant is
> submitted which sounds exciting, the QEP generates a bit of back and
> forth discussion, the grant wins but then is ultimately deemed
> technically unacceptable when the actual work is submitted for review.
>
> So my thoughts are that we could tweak the schedule to look like this:
> (changed bit in bold/italic)
>
> - Call for proposals (4 weeks)
> - QEP discussion period (2 weeks)
> - /QEP moves to the/*/CONTRIBUTOR /*/voting stage. If not approved,
> then the grant is ineligible and will be withdrawn. /Writing
> discussion summaries (1 week)
> - */COMMUNITY/ *Voting starts (2 weeks)
> - Publication of results
>
> How does that sound?
>
> Nyall
>
>
>
> >
> > We look forward to seeing all your great ideas for improving QGIS!
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Anita
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20250224/18471e97/attachment-0001.htm>