Indeed going a bit crazy ;) Looking at the document mentioned in the thread [0], it would be good if we could at least get the QEP requirement written in stone.
For the rest, I am a bit puzzled on the solutions. Maybe having only QEP already accepted would be an option, although being other issues such as timing for review. Cheers, Denis [0] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CNmSJxztrHrqLfillDH8v1zWaMzxFUyYSPT3sut55eQ/edit Le mar. 25 juin 2019 à 10:59, Nyall Dawson <nyall.daw...@gmail.com> a écrit : > On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 at 17:46, DelazJ <del...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > For the record, > http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Grant-application-suggestions-for-next-time-td5368078.html > from last year > > Oh good - thought I was going crazy with deja vu here. Turns out it's > just Denis who's going crazy ;) > > Nyall > > > > > Regards, > > Harrissou > > > > Le mar. 25 juin 2019 à 09:38, Alessandro Pasotti <apaso...@gmail.com> a > écrit : > >> > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:33 AM Denis Rouzaud <denis.rouz...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> I'd like to share my concern about the grant proposal and voting > process. I believe we have some serious weaknesses in this process, but > sadly I don't have perfect solutions to propose. > >>> > >>> First, I felt not completely honest while voting: I had 2 proposals > and one of my colleagues had another one. Can I be neutral and objective? > Probably not. > >>> The only solution which came to my mind is to prevent people from > voting on their own or voting at all if they anything submitted. But > looking at the people actually writing the proposals, it would be a > non-sense to prevent them from voting as they are the most aware of the > QGIS core code. > >>> > >>> It made me think of how voting modifications of the constitution > happens in Switzerland: the executive is sending out voting > recommendations. This could be an approach, that someone (PSC? a dedicated > group?) gives a technical advice on the proposals. But here again, it might > be difficult to be objective and mostly politically quite risky. > >>> > >>> This brings me to another issue: some proposal don't leave room for > technical discussion. On this part, I think that we should make writing a > QEP mandatory as it should be the place to discuss the proposal and to > raise concerns. What happens if a grant proposal is accepted but not its > implementation? > >> > >> > >> Denis, > >> > >> I second this last proposal. > >> > >> Thanks for raising the issue. > >> > >> -- > >> Alessandro Pasotti > >> w3: www.itopen.it > >> _______________________________________________ > >> QGIS-Developer mailing list > >> QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org > >> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > > > > _______________________________________________ > > QGIS-Developer mailing list > > QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org > > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > _______________________________________________ > QGIS-Developer mailing list > QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
_______________________________________________ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
