[Qgis-psc] Fwd: proposal for a QGIS documentation web infrastructure development sprint @ 7th QGIS Developer Meeting in Lyon 2012

[Anne Ghisla]

On Wed, 21 Mar 2012 12:26:42 +0200
Tim Sutton <tim at linfiniti.com> wrote:

> Hi
> 
> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Paolo Corti <pcorti at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 11:27 PM, Tim Sutton <tim at linfiniti.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> I just want to qualify my previous statement a little better: "I'd
> >> be happy to +1 that assuming we have the funds. I have two
> >> comments on the notes above:"
> >>
> >> In the past we had a rule that you must be a committer /
> >> contributor to obtain funding to attend the HF.  I would be happy
> >> to have Paolo C there and making his contribution but we just need
> >> to be mindful of the fact that we for example declined funding to
> >> Anne on a previous occasion because she didnt meet this 'must be a
> >> committer' criteria. In the light of the fact that we have a
> >> little more financial resources floating around maybe we can
> >> loosed this rule to include non established developers to be
> >> funded, but maybe we need to do it a little more transparently
> >> e.g. a call for funding requests and then some kind of evaluation
> >> process of who we will fund based on their contribution and
> >> funding requirements?

Hello all,

I second the call for transparency. A wiki page/ a static page on the
site could list the requirements for refund - the information will be
easily accessible, also for hackfest newcomers, and for any doubt
regarding eligibility.

Of course the requirements can be adapted to funding availability, and
to the new  git "committer" concept. 

> > Hello Tim, hello QGIS PSC
> >
> > I couldn't agree more with your reasons ;)
> > I understand that there are important project guidelines to follow,
> > and when I have been initially discussing with Paolo regarding this
> > possibility (joining the developer meeting for the purpose of
> > creating the infrastructure in the subject) I had no idea that this
> > could be a bit complicated because of these constraints.
> 
> Please note, I'm not suggesting that we shouldn't sponsor you, just
> that we should make the decision in a way that is fair.

Same for me! 

> > One option to go could be that I still could work on this stuff
> > without being in Lyon but remotely. Would it suit?
> >
> 
> Yes that would be fine too, but first lets do a call for sponsorship
> requests and see if we can afford to bring you there based on what
> other applications are received. I think the format of providing a
> simple work plan like you have done is a very workable way to evaluate
> whether we accept or refuse peoples applications (and of course from
> Paolo Cavallini's side, what the budget constraints are).

I also support the proposal of evaluating work plans. It is a mean of
encouraging an active participation to the hackfest, that is precisely
the purpose of a hackfest. The focus on fighting malicious refund
hunters should not distract us from this!

best,

Anne
-- 
http://gis.cri.fmach.it/ghisla/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20120321/000266ad/attachment.sig>