[Qgis-psc] Bugfixing for documentation

[Andreas Neumann]

Hi all,

Hm - We always had a separate budget for documentation - totally separate
>> from the grants.
>>
> According to our budget sheet, there's still money in the documentation
> pot, right?
>

Yes - but Matthias Kuhn is currently investigating another contributor who
could work on documentation. So there is a likelyhood that this money will
be needed anyway.

On the other hand the 10k in the budget for github to gitlab migration
hasn't been used yet. So I think we can also go a bit beyond the original
documentation budget, if the suggestion from Matthias (to be discussed
later) materializes.


> Personally, I would prefer if we could find a pragmatic solution so that
>> work, that wasn't planned ahead, can still be financed. Grants are only
>> issued once a year - for one-time work - not for repeated maintenance work.
>>
>> I think our Python devs would appreciate a complete API documentation.
>> This seems to be repeating work - isn't the API constantly changing a bit?
>> Mainly for major releases, but also some additions, fixes, clarifications,
>> etc. in betweeen?
>>
>> I think, in the future, we should declare API documentation as part of
>> the documentation budget and increase the documentation funds accordingly.
>>
> Can't we just do that now. I don't see a huge difference.
>

yes - I also think we should do it like this.


>
> We could also ask OSGeo if we don't have the funds. (Or have we asked them
> for anything else this year yet?)
>

Those are reserved to our upstream qt bug fixes and for WFS3 compliance
work and tests.

The qt upstream work with KDAB is turning out to be quite useful. As a
first batch we agreed to invest 6.5k € and see how far this would get us.
Then maybe continue a bit more, if Matthias and Nyall suggest so and we
still have funds.

Andreas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20190927/ebd51bce/attachment.html>