[Qgis-psc] Discussion our financial situation

[Alessandro Pasotti]

On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 9:28 AM Andreas Neumann <a.neumann at carto.net> wrote:

> Hi Matthias,
>
> Would it be an option to "self-host" appveyor at our own (to be ordered)
> Hetzner Windows machine?
>
> I see that Appveyor offers a self-hosted version, free for one team and
> with only community support: https://www.appveyor.com/self-hosted/
>
> Andreas
>
> On 2019-11-14 09:22, Matthias Kuhn wrote:
>
> Hi Andreas,
>
> Yes, I remember this. I also invested some time into AppVeyor back then
> and the timeouts.
>
> Finding a reliable solution and exploring possibilities will be an
> investment in itself already. I think that with a good financial situation,
> it's also a good possibility for the project to invest into such an area
> with a potentially great benefit. But it's ultimately the PSC's decision if
> the project prefers to sponsor this work or hope for it to happen and
> outsource the work and risks.
>
> Matthias
> On 11/14/19 8:59 AM, Andreas Neumann wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> The Windows CI thing would be worth-wile to invest it. But I think we
> already had it in the past and because of a lot of problems (e.g. timeouts
> when building, etc.) we stopped using it. I know that we definitely paid
> for such a service in the past. It was called "Appveyor" back then. Nyall
> might know more about it. I think he paid for it upfront and then I
> reimbursed him. That was in 2016.
>
> I think we would first have to find a reliable solution for Windows CI
> before investing into it.
>
> Andreas
>
> On 2019-11-14 08:51, Anita Graser wrote:
>
> Hi Andreas,
>
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 9:57 PM Andreas Neumann <a.neumann at carto.net>
> wrote:
>
> Any ideas? Do we have useful and important work that could be finished
> until January for around 15k?
>
> Should we invest more QGIS bug fixing? Documentation (if we find one)?
> Our infrastructure? Or upstream qt5 improvements?
>
>
> On the infrastructure side, there seems to be interest in Windows based
> CI. See current thread on [Qgis-psc] Direct push forbidden to master.
> However, I'm not 100% sure how this relates to a previous discussion from
> 2018 in the thread [QGIS-Developer] Windows compilation infrastructure.
>
> Regards,
> Anita
>
>
>
>
>

Hi, I fully agree on all proposals, if we have a few bucks lefts I'd really
like to dedicate some time to fix and enhance the HTML/CSS part of the
website and in particular the documentation/manual, I think that the
current style is not ideal and I would like to see something more similar
to https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/2.2/  with:
- TOC on the right side
- color theme more in line with our official color palette
- better fonts and styles for sections and headings
- better layout for bulleted lists

There are also some minor things that could be enhanced in the plugins
website:
- mobile layout has some glitches
- what to do with popular plugins (better algorithm?, drop it completely?)


Personally, I'd be happier to work on bugfixing but I also feel that
somebody should really dedicate some time to the visual side of the
websites.

Kind regards

-- 
Alessandro Pasotti
w3:   www.itopen.it
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20191114/c70f2a19/attachment.html>