From anitagraser at gmx.at  Tue May  5 00:06:30 2026
From: anitagraser at gmx.at (Anita Graser)
Date: Tue, 5 May 2026 09:06:30 +0200
Subject: [Qgis-psc] Grant programme 2026 ready for voting
Message-ID: <52fc6599-7947-4ed3-9225-bdbdf590bc38@gmx.at>

Hi,

The discussion phase is over and we have compiled the summaries for a total of 9 proposals. Some QEPs are already accepted with two +1 votes, others are not yet officially accepted but none appear to raise any red flags:

https://github.com/qgis/PSC/issues/66

The total budget requested is: ? 56,850.

This year's budget is ? 40,000.

@PSC members: Please cast your votes to:

1. Accept all proposals to the next stage.

2. Top up the budget so we can fund all proposals.

Regards,
Anita
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20260505/65d1c0ea/attachment-0001.htm>

From delazj at gmail.com  Tue May  5 01:01:29 2026
From: delazj at gmail.com (DelazJ)
Date: Tue, 05 May 2026 10:01:29 +0200
Subject: [Qgis-psc] Grant programme 2026 ready for voting
In-Reply-To: <52fc6599-7947-4ed3-9225-bdbdf590bc38@gmx.at>
References: <52fc6599-7947-4ed3-9225-bdbdf590bc38@gmx.at>
Message-ID: <77F2001A-830E-4D2E-8CC7-FF74E7BC8055@gmail.com>

Hi Anita, PSC
I probably have missed some information (and I would be happy to get pointed to the decision) but grant proposals are no longer subject to QGIS community (voting members) selection? Only code core commiters and PSC?

Kind regards,
Harrissou

Le 5 mai 2026 09:06:30 GMT+02:00, Anita Graser via QGIS-PSC <qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit?:
>Hi,
>
>The discussion phase is over and we have compiled the summaries for a total of 9 proposals. Some QEPs are already accepted with two +1 votes, others are not yet officially accepted but none appear to raise any red flags:
>
>https://github.com/qgis/PSC/issues/66
>
>The total budget requested is: ? 56,850.
>
>This year's budget is ? 40,000.
>
>@PSC members: Please cast your votes to:
>
>1. Accept all proposals to the next stage.
>
>2. Top up the budget so we can fund all proposals.
>
>Regards,
>Anita
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20260505/85a0e6d8/attachment.htm>

From andreas at qgis.org  Tue May  5 02:54:53 2026
From: andreas at qgis.org (Andreas Neumann)
Date: Tue, 5 May 2026 11:54:53 +0200
Subject: [Qgis-psc] Grant programme 2026 ready for voting
In-Reply-To: <77F2001A-830E-4D2E-8CC7-FF74E7BC8055@gmail.com>
References: <52fc6599-7947-4ed3-9225-bdbdf590bc38@gmx.at>
 <77F2001A-830E-4D2E-8CC7-FF74E7BC8055@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAB2Z92CQ0e3gcfJGRx1JnhT-mm7xxmTgaJeCuLRv_0Q++caWYw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Harrissou,

The plan is to first ask if we should accept all (56k) or stick to the
budget (40k). If the latter, then we need to vote. If the former we can
skip the voting.

>From the budget point of view we can afford to accept them all, because it
is already clear that some budget items won't use all planned funds. It
means we can afford to go the 16k over budget for the grants.

Of course, only technically sound and useful project should be accepted.

Personally I am +1 on accepting all proposals, if the core devs think the
proposals are good enough and useful.

Andreas

On Tue, 5 May 2026 at 10:01, DelazJ via QGIS-PSC <qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org>
wrote:

> Hi Anita, PSC
> I probably have missed some information (and I would be happy to get
> pointed to the decision) but grant proposals are no longer subject to QGIS
> community (voting members) selection? Only code core commiters and PSC?
>
> Kind regards,
> Harrissou
>
>
> Le 5 mai 2026 09:06:30 GMT+02:00, Anita Graser via QGIS-PSC <
> qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit :
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> The discussion phase is over and we have compiled the summaries for a
>> total of 9 proposals. Some QEPs are already accepted with two +1 votes,
>> others are not yet officially accepted but none appear to raise any red
>> flags:
>>
>> https://github.com/qgis/PSC/issues/66
>>
>> The total budget requested is: ? 56,850.
>>
>> This year's budget is ? 40,000.
>>
>> @PSC members: Please cast your votes to:
>>
>> 1. Accept all proposals to the next stage.
>>
>> 2. Top up the budget so we can fund all proposals.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Anita
>>
> _______________________________________________
> QGIS-PSC mailing list
> QGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>


-- 

--
Andreas Neumann
QGIS.ORG board member (treasurer)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20260505/e2f937d6/attachment.htm>

From regis at qgis.org  Tue May  5 04:49:52 2026
From: regis at qgis.org (=?UTF-8?Q?R=C3=A9gis_Haubourg?=)
Date: Tue, 5 May 2026 13:49:52 +0200
Subject: [Qgis-psc] Grant programme 2026 ready for voting
In-Reply-To: <CAB2Z92CQ0e3gcfJGRx1JnhT-mm7xxmTgaJeCuLRv_0Q++caWYw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <52fc6599-7947-4ed3-9225-bdbdf590bc38@gmx.at>
 <77F2001A-830E-4D2E-8CC7-FF74E7BC8055@gmail.com>
 <CAB2Z92CQ0e3gcfJGRx1JnhT-mm7xxmTgaJeCuLRv_0Q++caWYw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8515cf21-dd10-4067-b27b-e8fec88923d8@qgis.org>

Hi,

the list of QEP's seems good to me and if the finances allow, accepting 
them all would save us from a lot of work and frustration from rejected 
QEP's authors.
However, I see some QEP's didn't have any vote during the discussion phase.
Shouldn't we have a formal technical vote from core developpers before 
voting on fundings? Or just the absence of a negative vote implicitly is 
enough ?


Best regards,

R?gis Haubourg
Elected member at the Program Steering Comitee of QGIS.org.
-

On 05/05/2026 11:54, Andreas Neumann via QGIS-PSC wrote:
> Hi Harrissou,
>
> The plan is to first ask if we should accept all (56k) or stick to the 
> budget (40k). If the latter, then we need to vote. If the former we 
> can skip the voting.
>
> From the budget point of view we can afford to accept them all, 
> because it is already clear that some budget items won't use all 
> planned funds. It means we can afford to go the 16k over budget for 
> the grants.
>
> Of course, only technically sound and useful project should be accepted.
>
> Personally I am?+1 on accepting all proposals, if the core devs think 
> the proposals are good enough and useful.
>
> Andreas
>
> On Tue, 5 May 2026 at 10:01, DelazJ via QGIS-PSC 
> <qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote:
>
>     Hi Anita, PSC
>     I probably have missed some information (and I would be happy to
>     get pointed to the decision) but grant proposals are no longer
>     subject to QGIS community (voting members) selection? Only code
>     core commiters and PSC?
>
>     Kind regards,
>     Harrissou
>
>
>     Le 5 mai 2026 09:06:30 GMT+02:00, Anita Graser via QGIS-PSC
>     <qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit?:
>
>         Hi,
>
>         The discussion phase is over and we have compiled the
>         summaries for a total of 9 proposals. Some QEPs are already
>         accepted with two +1 votes, others are not yet officially
>         accepted but none appear to raise any red flags:
>
>         https://github.com/qgis/PSC/issues/66
>
>         The total budget requested is: ? 56,850.
>
>         This year's budget is ? 40,000.
>
>         @PSC members: Please cast your votes to:
>
>         1. Accept all proposals to the next stage.
>
>         2. Top up the budget so we can fund all proposals.
>
>         Regards,
>         Anita
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     QGIS-PSC mailing list
>     QGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.org
>     https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>
>
>
> -- 
>
> --
> Andreas Neumann
> QGIS.ORG <http://QGIS.ORG> board member (treasurer)
>
> _______________________________________________
> QGIS-PSC mailing list
> QGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20260505/97a31a36/attachment-0001.htm>

From apasotti at gmail.com  Tue May  5 06:11:44 2026
From: apasotti at gmail.com (Alessandro Pasotti)
Date: Tue, 5 May 2026 15:11:44 +0200
Subject: [Qgis-psc] Grant programme 2026 ready for voting
In-Reply-To: <52fc6599-7947-4ed3-9225-bdbdf590bc38@gmx.at>
References: <52fc6599-7947-4ed3-9225-bdbdf590bc38@gmx.at>
Message-ID: <CAL5Q671-s-xOzgDOQ4ZrvzqwMNjrQetXRjDT55xG2QKPMH3qpA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

I'm ok with topping the budget if we can.

On Tue, May 5, 2026 at 9:11?AM Anita Graser via QGIS-PSC
<qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> The discussion phase is over and we have compiled the summaries for a total of 9 proposals. Some QEPs are already accepted with two +1 votes, others are not yet officially accepted but none appear to raise any red flags:
>
> https://github.com/qgis/PSC/issues/66
>
> The total budget requested is: ? 56,850.
>
> This year's budget is ? 40,000.
>
> @PSC members: Please cast your votes to:
>
> 1. Accept all proposals to the next stage.
>
> 2. Top up the budget so we can fund all proposals.
>
> Regards,
> Anita
> _______________________________________________
> QGIS-PSC mailing list
> QGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc



-- 
Alessandro Pasotti
QCooperative:  www.qcooperative.net
ItOpen:   www.itopen.it

From anitagraser at gmx.at  Tue May  5 11:14:04 2026
From: anitagraser at gmx.at (Anita Graser)
Date: Tue, 5 May 2026 20:14:04 +0200
Subject: [Qgis-psc] Grant programme 2026 ready for voting
In-Reply-To: <8515cf21-dd10-4067-b27b-e8fec88923d8@qgis.org>
References: <52fc6599-7947-4ed3-9225-bdbdf590bc38@gmx.at>
 <77F2001A-830E-4D2E-8CC7-FF74E7BC8055@gmail.com>
 <CAB2Z92CQ0e3gcfJGRx1JnhT-mm7xxmTgaJeCuLRv_0Q++caWYw@mail.gmail.com>
 <8515cf21-dd10-4067-b27b-e8fec88923d8@qgis.org>
Message-ID: <7f80a456-a990-4e58-b3dd-9d86fb7572ff@gmx.at>

Hi R?gis,

> Or just the absence of a negative vote implicitly is enough ?

That's correct. Like in previous years, the PSC retains the right to make executive decisions after the discussion period.

Anita

May 5, 2026 13:50:01 R?gis Haubourg via QGIS-PSC <qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org>:

> Hi,?
> 
> the list of QEP's seems good to me and if the finances allow, accepting them all would save us from a lot of work and frustration from rejected QEP's authors.?
> However, I see some QEP's didn't have any vote during the discussion phase.?
> Shouldn't we have a formal technical vote from core developpers before voting on fundings? Or just the absence of a negative vote implicitly is enough ??
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> R?gis Haubourg
> Elected member at the Program Steering Comitee of QGIS.org.
> -
> On 05/05/2026 11:54, Andreas Neumann via QGIS-PSC wrote:
>> Hi Harrissou,
>> 
>> The plan is to first ask if we should accept all (56k) or stick to the budget (40k). If the latter, then we need to vote. If the former we can skip the voting.
>> 
>> From the budget point of view we can afford to accept them all, because it is already clear that some budget items won't use all planned funds. It means we can afford to go the 16k over budget for the grants.
>> 
>> Of course, only technically sound and useful project should be accepted.
>> 
>> Personally I am?+1 on accepting all proposals, if the core devs think the proposals are good enough and useful.
>> 
>> Andreas
>> 
>> On Tue, 5 May 2026 at 10:01, DelazJ via QGIS-PSC <qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote:
>>> Hi Anita, PSC
>>> I probably have missed some information (and I would be happy to get pointed to the decision) but grant proposals are no longer subject to QGIS community (voting members) selection? Only code core commiters and PSC?
>>> 
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Harrissou
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Le 5 mai 2026 09:06:30 GMT+02:00, Anita Graser via QGIS-PSC <qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit?:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> The discussion phase is over and we have compiled the summaries for a total of 9 proposals. Some QEPs are already accepted with two +1 votes, others are not yet officially accepted but none appear to raise any red flags:
>>>> 
>>>> https://github.com/qgis/PSC/issues/66
>>>> 
>>>> The total budget requested is: ? 56,850.
>>>> 
>>>> This year's budget is ? 40,000.
>>>> 
>>>> @PSC members: Please cast your votes to:
>>>> 
>>>> 1. Accept all proposals to the next stage.
>>>> 
>>>> 2. Top up the budget so we can fund all proposals.
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Anita
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> QGIS-PSC mailing list
>>> QGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Andreas Neumann
>> QGIS.ORG[http://QGIS.ORG] board member (treasurer)
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> QGIS-PSC mailing list
>> QGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20260505/9abf4b10/attachment.htm>

From nyall.dawson at gmail.com  Wed May  6 20:20:12 2026
From: nyall.dawson at gmail.com (Nyall Dawson)
Date: Thu, 7 May 2026 13:20:12 +1000
Subject: [Qgis-psc] Announcing QEP 425: Document stable API policy
Message-ID: <CAB28AshNiUj0kNuznjUfssv3UcLY-cP8JBLVyoTH7Hj=C89QJw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi lists,

I've taken some time to write up our (currently undocumented) stable API
policies. This has been submitted as
https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals/pull/382 for discussion.

It is initially intended as a formal description of CURRENT POLICIES ONLY,
which can be later modified and revised (in an atomic manner) if we want to
change any of these policies. As such, please refrain from using this
initial request as a place to discuss changes to current practice. Rather,
let's keep discussion focused on whether this is an accurate and complete
description of our current policies. ?

The end goal here is having a formal policy in place describing all our API
stability rules, which will help ease new developers into contributing
effectively to QGIS and remove some of the unspoken assumptions surrounding
QGIS development.

Regards,
Nyall
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20260507/ef18f6e9/attachment-0001.htm>

From jef at norbit.de  Fri May  8 10:44:08 2026
From: jef at norbit.de (=?utf-8?Q?J=C3=BCrgen_E=2E?= Fischer)
Date: Fri, 8 May 2026 19:44:08 +0200
Subject: [Qgis-psc] Grant programme 2026 ready for voting
In-Reply-To: <CAL5Q671-s-xOzgDOQ4ZrvzqwMNjrQetXRjDT55xG2QKPMH3qpA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <52fc6599-7947-4ed3-9225-bdbdf590bc38@gmx.at>
 <CAL5Q671-s-xOzgDOQ4ZrvzqwMNjrQetXRjDT55xG2QKPMH3qpA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20260508174408.f7m37kv622ok7ccp@norbit.de>

Hi,

On Tue, 05. May 2026 at 15:11:44 +0200, Alessandro Pasotti via QGIS-PSC wrote:
> I'm ok with topping the budget if we can.

me too


J?rgen

-- 
J?rgen E. Fischer           norBIT GmbH             Tel. +49-4931-918175-31
Dipl.-Inf. (FH)             Rheinstra?e 13          Fax. +49-4931-918175-50
Software Engineer           D-26506 Norden            https://www.norbit.de
QGIS release manager (PSC)  Germany                  Matrix: @jef:osgeo.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20260508/398acb4e/attachment.sig>

From marco at qgis.org  Sat May  9 03:27:04 2026
From: marco at qgis.org (Marco Bernasocchi)
Date: Sat, 9 May 2026 12:27:04 +0200
Subject: [Qgis-psc] Grant programme 2026 ready for voting
In-Reply-To: <7f80a456-a990-4e58-b3dd-9d86fb7572ff@gmx.at>
References: <52fc6599-7947-4ed3-9225-bdbdf590bc38@gmx.at>
 <77F2001A-830E-4D2E-8CC7-FF74E7BC8055@gmail.com>
 <CAB2Z92CQ0e3gcfJGRx1JnhT-mm7xxmTgaJeCuLRv_0Q++caWYw@mail.gmail.com>
 <8515cf21-dd10-4067-b27b-e8fec88923d8@qgis.org>
 <7f80a456-a990-4e58-b3dd-9d86fb7572ff@gmx.at>
Message-ID: <CAB2ZMRCu+oKrpow+nb-r+-cnBpcBqObc-XT1AdwVGLJRkw+Qtw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all, sorry for the late reply,
I'm also +1 on raising the budget and accept all technically sound projects.

Cheers

Marco Bernasocchi

QGIS.org Chair
OSGEO.org VP Europe
OPENGIS.ch CEO
http://berna.io

On Tue, 5 May 2026, 20:14 Anita Graser via QGIS-PSC, <
qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote:

> Hi R?gis,
>
> > Or just the absence of a negative vote implicitly is enough ?
>
> That's correct. Like in previous years, the PSC retains the right to make
> executive decisions after the discussion period.
>
> Anita
>
> May 5, 2026 13:50:01 R?gis Haubourg via QGIS-PSC <qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> >:
>
> Hi,
>
> the list of QEP's seems good to me and if the finances allow, accepting
> them all would save us from a lot of work and frustration from rejected
> QEP's authors.
> However, I see some QEP's didn't have any vote during the discussion
> phase.
> Shouldn't we have a formal technical vote from core developpers before
> voting on fundings? Or just the absence of a negative vote implicitly is
> enough ?
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> R?gis Haubourg
> Elected member at the Program Steering Comitee of QGIS.org.
> -
>
> On 05/05/2026 11:54, Andreas Neumann via QGIS-PSC wrote:
>
> Hi Harrissou,
>
> The plan is to first ask if we should accept all (56k) or stick to the
> budget (40k). If the latter, then we need to vote. If the former we can
> skip the voting.
>
> From the budget point of view we can afford to accept them all, because it
> is already clear that some budget items won't use all planned funds. It
> means we can afford to go the 16k over budget for the grants.
>
> Of course, only technically sound and useful project should be accepted.
>
> Personally I am +1 on accepting all proposals, if the core devs think the
> proposals are good enough and useful.
>
> Andreas
>
> On Tue, 5 May 2026 at 10:01, DelazJ via QGIS-PSC <qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Anita, PSC
>> I probably have missed some information (and I would be happy to get
>> pointed to the decision) but grant proposals are no longer subject to QGIS
>> community (voting members) selection? Only code core commiters and PSC?
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Harrissou
>>
>>
>> Le 5 mai 2026 09:06:30 GMT+02:00, Anita Graser via QGIS-PSC <
>> qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit :
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The discussion phase is over and we have compiled the summaries for a
>>> total of 9 proposals. Some QEPs are already accepted with two +1 votes,
>>> others are not yet officially accepted but none appear to raise any red
>>> flags:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/qgis/PSC/issues/66
>>>
>>> The total budget requested is: ? 56,850.
>>>
>>> This year's budget is ? 40,000.
>>>
>>> @PSC members: Please cast your votes to:
>>>
>>> 1. Accept all proposals to the next stage.
>>>
>>> 2. Top up the budget so we can fund all proposals.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Anita
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> QGIS-PSC mailing list
>> QGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>>
>
>
> --
>
> --
> Andreas Neumann
> QGIS.ORG board member (treasurer)
>
> _______________________________________________
> QGIS-PSC mailing listQGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.orghttps://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>
> _______________________________________________
> QGIS-PSC mailing list
> QGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20260509/6ac2c5ef/attachment.htm>

From tim at qgis.org  Mon May 11 00:21:41 2026
From: tim at qgis.org (Tim Sutton)
Date: Mon, 11 May 2026 08:21:41 +0100
Subject: [Qgis-psc] Grant programme 2026 ready for voting
In-Reply-To: <CAB2ZMRCu+oKrpow+nb-r+-cnBpcBqObc-XT1AdwVGLJRkw+Qtw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <52fc6599-7947-4ed3-9225-bdbdf590bc38@gmx.at>
 <77F2001A-830E-4D2E-8CC7-FF74E7BC8055@gmail.com>
 <CAB2Z92CQ0e3gcfJGRx1JnhT-mm7xxmTgaJeCuLRv_0Q++caWYw@mail.gmail.com>
 <8515cf21-dd10-4067-b27b-e8fec88923d8@qgis.org>
 <7f80a456-a990-4e58-b3dd-9d86fb7572ff@gmx.at>
 <CAB2ZMRCu+oKrpow+nb-r+-cnBpcBqObc-XT1AdwVGLJRkw+Qtw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CADwz+dVHwvLucjs9eu7JErWeiq3mQ6G12K2OwzTW1F+r+J_hKA@mail.gmail.com>

Just to be on the record, +1 from me too.

On Sat, May 9, 2026 at 11:27?AM Marco Bernasocchi via QGIS-PSC <
qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote:

> Hi all, sorry for the late reply,
> I'm also +1 on raising the budget and accept all technically sound
> projects.
>
> Cheers
>
> Marco Bernasocchi
>
> QGIS.org Chair
> OSGEO.org VP Europe
> OPENGIS.ch CEO
> http://berna.io
>
> On Tue, 5 May 2026, 20:14 Anita Graser via QGIS-PSC, <
> qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi R?gis,
>>
>> > Or just the absence of a negative vote implicitly is enough ?
>>
>> That's correct. Like in previous years, the PSC retains the right to make
>> executive decisions after the discussion period.
>>
>> Anita
>>
>> May 5, 2026 13:50:01 R?gis Haubourg via QGIS-PSC <
>> qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org>:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> the list of QEP's seems good to me and if the finances allow, accepting
>> them all would save us from a lot of work and frustration from rejected
>> QEP's authors.
>> However, I see some QEP's didn't have any vote during the discussion
>> phase.
>> Shouldn't we have a formal technical vote from core developpers before
>> voting on fundings? Or just the absence of a negative vote implicitly is
>> enough ?
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> R?gis Haubourg
>> Elected member at the Program Steering Comitee of QGIS.org.
>> -
>>
>> On 05/05/2026 11:54, Andreas Neumann via QGIS-PSC wrote:
>>
>> Hi Harrissou,
>>
>> The plan is to first ask if we should accept all (56k) or stick to the
>> budget (40k). If the latter, then we need to vote. If the former we can
>> skip the voting.
>>
>> From the budget point of view we can afford to accept them all, because
>> it is already clear that some budget items won't use all planned funds. It
>> means we can afford to go the 16k over budget for the grants.
>>
>> Of course, only technically sound and useful project should be accepted.
>>
>> Personally I am +1 on accepting all proposals, if the core devs think the
>> proposals are good enough and useful.
>>
>> Andreas
>>
>> On Tue, 5 May 2026 at 10:01, DelazJ via QGIS-PSC <
>> qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Anita, PSC
>>> I probably have missed some information (and I would be happy to get
>>> pointed to the decision) but grant proposals are no longer subject to QGIS
>>> community (voting members) selection? Only code core commiters and PSC?
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Harrissou
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 5 mai 2026 09:06:30 GMT+02:00, Anita Graser via QGIS-PSC <
>>> qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org> a ?crit :
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> The discussion phase is over and we have compiled the summaries for a
>>>> total of 9 proposals. Some QEPs are already accepted with two +1 votes,
>>>> others are not yet officially accepted but none appear to raise any red
>>>> flags:
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/qgis/PSC/issues/66
>>>>
>>>> The total budget requested is: ? 56,850.
>>>>
>>>> This year's budget is ? 40,000.
>>>>
>>>> @PSC members: Please cast your votes to:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Accept all proposals to the next stage.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Top up the budget so we can fund all proposals.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Anita
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> QGIS-PSC mailing list
>>> QGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> --
>> Andreas Neumann
>> QGIS.ORG board member (treasurer)
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> QGIS-PSC mailing listQGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.orghttps://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> QGIS-PSC mailing list
>> QGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>>
> _______________________________________________
> QGIS-PSC mailing list
> QGIS-PSC at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>


-- 



*Tim Sutton*
QGIS Project Steering Committee
tim at qgis.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20260511/6eaf6425/attachment-0001.htm>