[Qgis-psc] Budgeting 'unattractive' work via grants and PSC (was again about the bug tracker)

[Vincent Picavet (ml)]

Hi Tim,

On 12/10/2018 08:06, Tim Sutton wrote:
> Just a couple of meta-thoughts on the funding side:
[..]
> My point really here is that you should not see the budget and grant
> programme as a constraint but rather as a resource and I am sure the PSC
> would favourably support (through the above mechanisms) any reasonable
> request to find money for important infrastructure work, improve the
> grant process etc.

Thanks a lot Tim for this full clarification ! Great to hear all this.

If we can make specific requests for budgets outside of Grant
Application, and budget is available, it is less important that Grant
Application favor ground work over new features. Seems a good balanced
way to go.

It would be really good to have this summary written somewhere available
to anyone. Not sure exactly where though.

As for the infrastructure, we will make a specific budget request to
move things on again then.

Thanks again !

Vincent

> 
> Rock on guys!
> 
> Regards
> 
> Tim
> 
> 
>> On 12 Oct 2018, at 01:41, Nyall Dawson <nyall.dawson at gmail.com
>> <mailto:nyall.dawson at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>> The latter is clearly the reason. And I do think this is the limit of
>>> our current grant application program. It works well to decide for new
>>> features, but not for ground-level, hard, not shiny but necessary work.
>>> This has been seen multiple times with latest call for grant
>>> applications. I can understand it from a user point of view, but I do
>>> think this is the role of QGIS.Org <http://QGIS.Org> to find a way to
>>> mitigate this.
>>> Funding features is not hard, while funding "uninteresting" but
>>> necessary work is. Bugfixing, bug triaging, PR Review, documentation,
>>> infrastructure... My opinion is that QGIS.Org <http://QGIS.Org>
>>> should concentrate on
>>> these topics.
>>> This is not the main issue here though.
>>
>> Can I request that this topic be split out into its own conversation?
>> You've clearly got concerns with the current grant process, so let's
>> not let the discussion about bug tracker/code repo get locked up with
>> this other discussion too. (Heck, it's complex/sensitive enough as it
>> is!).
>>
>> Nyall
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> 
> *Tim Sutton*
> tim at qgis.org <mailto:tim at qgis.org>
> 
> 
> 
>