[Qgis-psc] New QEP process

[Nathan Woodrow]

Hey Tim,

That wasn't directed at you.  Mainly addressing Paolo's comments about
speed vs process.

I will implement this process into the QEPs this week and we can go from
there.  We will need to update the list of maintainers for each section to
help with this if we can.

Regards,
Nathan

On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Tim Sutton <tim at kartoza.com> wrote:

> Hi
>
>
>
> On 16 Nov 2015, at 00:58, Nathan Woodrow <madmanwoo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I agree and that is no my intention.  So if this doesn't work we can cut
> it down more, however the whole point of it is so that we move as one and
> not random parts.  I don't want to take away from the speed of the project
> however I think it's always good to have some kind of process so we can
> coordinate the efforts if required.
>
>
> Thanks Nathan. My comment was intended to be a more general one in that
> there are many rules being proposed about the social mechanisms by which we
> propose and accept code into the code base and we need to document them
> some where and try to keep them simple enough that everyone clearly
> understands them. My apologies I should have probably spun that part of my
> reply into its own threads to make it clearer that I agree with your
> proposal (along with a suggestion of adding labels).
>
> Regards
>
> Tim
>
>
> - Nathan
>
> On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 11:32 PM, Paolo Cavallini <cavallini at faunalia.it>
> wrote:
>
>> Il 15/11/2015 13:44, Tim Sutton ha scritto:
>>
>> > We need to find a way to manage the growing amount of bureaucracy we are
>> > introducing into the project. I think many of Jürgen’s comments over the
>> > past weeks speak to this. Its nice to make the project organised but we
>> > need to make sure that new (and existing) users are aware of the
>> > procedures and at the same time, that those procedures don’t weigh down
>> > the contribution process to the point that only those in commercial
>> > environments will ever venture so spend the time to make a patch.
>> >
>> > I think at minimum the various processes we have should be provided as
>> > notes in the project governance documentation, and we should really try
>> > to make things so that we can maintain a rapid development cycle.
>>
>> Agreed fully. Not easy to keep a good balance here. And let's remember
>> the most surprising result of our recent poll is that users need more
>> functions, so we cannot afford slowing down the development pace
>> considerably.
>> All the best.
>>
>> --
>> Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
>> QGIS & PostGIS courses: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qgis-psc mailing list
>> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>
>
> —
>
>
>
>
> Tim Sutton
>
> Visit http://kartoza.com to find out about open source:
>
> * Desktop GIS programming services
> * Geospatial web development
> * GIS Training
> * Consulting Services
>
> Skype: timlinux Irc: timlinux on #qgis at freenode.net
> Tim is a member of the QGIS Project Steering Committee
>
> Kartoza is a merger between Linfiniti and Afrispatial
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20151116/6df0e217/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: KartozaLogo160x66.png
Type: image/png
Size: 9324 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20151116/6df0e217/attachment.png>