[Qgis-psc] Investigating CMYK support in Qt/QGIS

[Andreas Neumann]

> I'm in general not totally comfortable when funds go to activities not
> directly involved in the QGIS project, except when they go to
> GIS-oriented (OSGEO) "brother" projects (like GDAL or PROJ to cite a
> few).
> 
> In this case, because the amount seems relatively small (how do they
> exactly charge for one working day?) and because I see the potential
> to have professional color support in QGIS I think I'm ok with that.
> 
> For any follow-up work there will most likely be some institutional crowd funding. 
> Wouldn't it be possible to pay-back the initial investment done with
> QGIS funds if the crowd-funding goes well?

Andreas I also think we risk blurring the lines here - the original idea
for KDAB  funding, as I understood it, was to be able to have hard core
Qt upstream issues fixed that affect QGIS stability or performance. I
wasn't clear from your description if that is the case, or whether it is
the case that we are wanting new upstream Qt features to support new
features in QGIS? If we do that spend money on CMYK, are we eroding our
funds that might go into fixing bugs and stability issues? 

Yes, the qt5 upstream budget is meant to fix bugs and issues, which is
not the case here. You are right. CMYK in qt would be a new feature in
qt. 

It would be an initial investment necessary to help attract a follow-up
crowd funding. But we could do as Alessandro suggested, that the
follow-up project should pay back this relatively small initial
investment. 

Greetings, 

Andreas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20200701/9fee165c/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: KartozaNewLogoThumbnail.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 6122 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20200701/9fee165c/attachment.jpg>