[Qgis-psc] Discussion our financial situation

[Paolo Cavallini]

Hi Andreas, others,

Il 14/11/19 08:37, Andreas Neumann ha scritto:

>> * the missed expenses for GH migration means that the devs did it
>> voluntarily?
>>  
>  
> That budget item was actually for github to gitlab migration - which did
> not really happen and there isn't even consensus that we should do it.

thanks for clarifying

> If you mean the Redmine to Github issue migration - yes, that wasn't
> invoiced and thus voluntary work.

thanks again

>> * I see LC meeting was more expensive than predicted; I understand the
>> organizers devoted back a part of the income to QGIS.ORG: does this
>> balance off?
>>  
>  
> What is an LC meeting? Sorry, I don't understand this term.

Juergen was right, as usual - sorry for being too short

>> * certification is starting to get momentum; the plan was to have a
>> self-sustaining structure, so I believe a part of the surplus should be
>> devoted to the development, setup, and management of the infrastructure
>> (thanks Tim!)
>>  
>  
> Yes, it's progressing nicely. I wonder, if in the future, such income
> should be dedicated into improving the training material and education
> situation? Would make sense to me. As many people pointed out, training
> and education, and getting into University curricula seems to be one of
> the key factors why ESRI is so successful. It would make sense to
> dedicate funds towards this aspect. Not that I have clear ideas what
> this means, but maybe others have?

IMHO the first funds should be used to cover the setup expenses; in the
longer term improving the documentation would be good too (see my other
email on this subject).

>> I'd appreciate your comments on these points.
>> If we end up with a net profit, I suggest reinvesting it mostly in
>> bugfixing, secondarily in grant programs (something like 75/25). I
>> believe the interesting proposal from Tim can easily fall in the second
>> category.
>>  
>  
> yes
>  
>>
>> I think we should also discuss about:
>> * how effective each expense is, to learn from the lesson and do an even
>> better allocation for the future
>>  
>  
> I think most of the expenses (bug fixing definitely, grants, maintenance
> of packaging and code reviews, CI, etc.) definitely pay off. There is no
> doubt about that. Also investing into our infrastructure is a necessity.
> Do you see any expenses that seem unnecessary or ineffective? I don't

It is quite normal that of all investments some is more fruitful than
others. I'd like to know the general feeling about that, in a frank and
open manner.

> Another thing that we should continue is investing into related and
> upstream projects. The qt5 improvement and collaboration with KDAB seems
> to have been successful and there would be further improvements that
> would be useful.

good to know - it would be good to have a very short report of this
success, to spread the voice more widely

>> * the balance between paid work and volunteer work, to ensure a fair
>> treatment for anybody.
>>  
>  
> That is always a tough topic. What I can say is that most, if not all,
> people who get payments from QGIS.ORG invest in addition at least an
> equal amount of time that they invoice to QGIS.ORG. Also enabling our
> core devs to dedicate some days in a row an bug fixing and let them
> focus in some areas of our code base or grant projects is more effective
> in my opinion than trying to come up with complicated other systems,
> like estimating things up-front and ask for detailed quotes. This would
> only add a lot of administrative burdens and by the time, devs analyzed
> things to do a proper quote, they already did most of the work.

I'm 100% with you about avoiding complications and bureaucracy - this
has always been our strength, let's keep on this path.
What I'd like is that people have (what they perceive as) equal
treatment for equal investment. There are several tasks (I repeat
myself, I know) of which some are paid and some are volunteer. IMHO this
is causing frictions and discontent, which we occasionally see
surfacing, and we should avoid to maintain a friendly and pleasant
community. I know it's not an easy task, that's why I'm submitting my
thought asking for suggestions.

Cheers.
-- 
Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
QGIS.ORG Chair:
http://planet.qgis.org/planet/user/28/tag/qgis%20board/