PSC Meeting 27 February 2015¶
PSC Meeting 6 February 2015¶
Proposed meeting time:¶
Friday 6th February, 1430 UTC, 5:30 AKDT, 1630 SAST, 00:30(27th) AEST, 1530 CEST
IRC: #qgis_meeting_150227
Members Present:¶
- aa
- bb
Agenda:¶
- criteria for refunding: PSC, core devs (how defined?), documentors, infrastructure maintainers, translators, other? Max amount per head? (pcav)
- Status 2.8 release, banner/site/blog (RD)
- Status 2.8 docs release (RD)
- Shops, 'official' opening? (RD)
- Credits for code contributors, guidelines (pcav)
- <plz add>
Log¶
--- Log opened Fr Feb 27 15:43:05 2015 15:43 -!- jef [fischer@qgis/developer/jef] has joined #qgis_meeting_150227 15:43 -!- Irssi: #qgis_meeting_150227: Total of 4 nicks [1 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 3 normal] 15:43 -!- Irssi: Join to #qgis_meeting_150227 was synced in 13 secs 15:43 < jef> hi. 15:43 < jef> where's tim? 15:43 <@duiv> hi 15:43 <@duiv> moving hous 15:43 <@duiv> e 15:43 < anitagraser> going to jakarta i think 15:44 <@duiv> and ^^ 15:44 < jef> duiv: he's moving his house to jakarta? 15:44 < anitagraser> yes, jef 15:44 <@duiv> nope 15:45 -!- mhugent [[email protected]] has joined #qgis_meeting_150227 15:45 <@duiv> hi marco 15:45 < mhugent> hi duiv 15:45 < anitagraser> hi mhugent 15:45 < mhugent> hi all 15:46 <@duiv> http://hub.qgis.org/wiki/quantum-gis/PSC_Meeting_27_February_2015 15:46 -!- jef changed the topic of #qgis_meeting_150227 to: http://hub.qgis.org/wiki/quantum-gis/PSC_Meeting_27_February_2015 15:46 < anitagraser> 1. criteria for refunding: PSC, core devs (how defined?), documentors, infrastructure maintainers, translators, other? Max amount per head? (pcav) 15:47 < pcav> ok 15:47 < pcav> I think the issue is clear: 15:48 < pcav> IMHO we need clear rules to accept or deny refund 15:48 < pcav> doing it on ad hoc case risks: 15:48 < pcav> * to spoil our budget 15:48 < pcav> * even more seriously, to cause discontent 15:48 < pcav> opinions? 15:48 < anitagraser> our current budget draft contains 10k twice a year for HF 15:49 <@duiv> as long as we keep it as transaparent as possible, PSC can decide I think based on 'rules' 15:49 <@duiv> but it's never obvious how valuable somebody is for the project 15:50 < pcav> duiv: right 15:50 <@duiv> but let's start with the rules? 15:50 < anitagraser> rules for groups of people PSC, core devs (how defined?), documentors, infrastructure maintainers, translators, other? 15:51 < anitagraser> or do you mean the basic rule: do people have to apply in advance 15:51 <@duiv> your first option 15:51 < anitagraser> on a one-time basis or for each HF 15:52 < pcav> one issue is: 15:52 < pcav> why asking very core dev to apply? 15:53 < pcav> IMHO we can put out a list of people that are accepted by default 15:53 < pcav> e.g. core devs and psc members 15:53 <@duiv> well, I think you should not apply if you earn enough or when the costs < 300 euro or so 15:54 <@duiv> so higher the bar for people 15:54 <@duiv> also for core-devs and psc 15:55 <@duiv> but that is just an opinion 15:55 < anitagraser> high bar for volunteers who already don't get paid for their contributions 15:55 < anitagraser> if I would have to rank them, i would say: psc > core devs > infrastructure maintainers > documenters > translators 15:57 < pcav> can we come out with a series of proposals to vote? 15:57 < anitagraser> maybe psc and core dev (= committers) don't need to apply 15:57 < pcav> +1 15:57 < anitagraser> +1 15:57 < pcav> even though committer is a rather empty shell nowadays 15:58 < anitagraser> pcav: can you explain? are there that many people with write access to the repo? 15:58 < mhugent> agreed. Is a committer someone with push access to master or someone who has submitted >0 pull requests? 15:59 < anitagraser> i was thinking push access to master 16:00 < anitagraser> duiv: ? 16:02 < pcav> IMHO push is not a clear criterion 16:02 <@duiv> I can have a look, but I would think 20 people have push access 16:03 < jef> 30 16:03 <@duiv> yep that is what I see now :-) 16:04 < anitagraser> any other suggestions for better definitions then? 16:04 <@duiv> I agree that a committer is a core-dev 16:04 <@duiv> if not: remove commit rights 16:05 < mhugent> I also think it is a good definition 16:06 <@duiv> looking at the list, I would maybe remove 2 or three persons (2 of them I do not know) 16:06 <@duiv> for the rest I really consider core-devs 16:06 < anitagraser> then the question is: committer = core dev = does not need to apply? 16:06 <@duiv> I think you should always apply 16:07 <@duiv> otherwise you never can do budgetting 16:07 <@duiv> and also for transparency it should be clear that that guy from The Netherlands is always applying, but not doing anything :-) 16:08 <@duiv> (sidetrack: /me applied twice I think) 16:08 < mhugent> +1. You have to book your ticket anyway. So applying is not an extra effort 16:09 <@duiv> we can have some 'dead-line' for appliance. Like an early bird discount 16:10 <@duiv> if we have a list which is too long (aka costs too much) as a psc we should pick the people which we value the most 16:10 <@duiv> somebody has to do this dirty job 16:11 < anitagraser> i can live with duiv's solution 16:12 <@duiv> pcav: what about: coredevs: max 100% coverage, others max 50% coverage? 16:12 < pcav> -1 for me 16:12 <@duiv> then we have 'just' two groups 16:12 <@duiv> why? 16:13 < pcav> if people is important for the project, we have to cover 16:13 < pcav> fully 16:14 < pcav> if not, they can cover their own expenses 16:14 < anitagraser> I'm with pcav on that 16:14 <@duiv> then why make the difference besteen devs/translators/etc etc 16:15 < anitagraser> duiv: i think that was just a listing of potential groupings, which we don't have to follow 16:15 <@duiv> then everybody applies, pcav and everybody sees the list, and psc decides which people do get money 16:17 < anitagraser> if those who think we need tight rules now won't make some specific suggestions, i think that's how it will be 16:17 < pcav> I would like to avoid arbitrary decisions 16:18 <@duiv> it's not arbitrary: but you will never get clear rules. 16:18 <@duiv> that is why there are so many lawyers 16:18 <@duiv> make some rules: like 16:19 <@duiv> - everybody can apply at least 40 days in advance 16:19 <@duiv> - based on that, psc will decide who will get refunds 16:20 <@duiv> - you can try to apply later, but that will be decided after the hackfest when it is clear if we still have money 16:20 <@duiv> - we will probably favour core-devs and psc-members 16:20 <@duiv> (deal with it) 16:20 * anitagraser has to leave in 15 min 16:21 <@duiv> maybe I sound rude, but I think you cannot be more clear in this 16:21 < pcav> ok 16:21 < pcav> at least we have a first step 16:22 <@duiv> make it 42 days :-) 16:22 < anitagraser> i think we could put that in a gdoc, improve it together over the next week and then publish it for the nodebo meeting to test it 16:23 < pcav> ok 16:23 <@duiv> pcav: can you do that? 16:23 < pcav> ok 16:23 <@duiv> so next item? 16:23 <@duiv> Status 2.8 release, banner/site/blog 16:24 <@duiv> I already asked jef, but he is waiting for some things from Tim 16:24 < jef> changelog. 16:25 <@duiv> I think the visual changelog is ok, but currently I'm not able to download it as rst because of a problem with that Django app 16:25 <@duiv> so: as soon as I can download the rst I'll put it in the site 16:26 <@duiv> then as jef gives green light, I'll do the new banner, and website stuff 16:26 <@duiv> and maybe somebody can do a blog post as some sort of official announcement? 16:26 < anitagraser> I can do that if you want 16:26 <@duiv> plz 16:26 < anitagraser> just tell me when to press publish :) 16:27 <@duiv> http://changelog.linfiniti.com/qgis/version/2.8.0/ still 500 16:27 < jef> duiv: otherwise I would have announced yesterday 16:27 -!- anitagraser [3edaa47e@gateway/web/freenode/ip.62.218.164.126] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 16:28 -!- anitagraser [3edaa47e@gateway/web/freenode/ip.62.218.164.126] has joined #qgis_meeting_150227 16:28 <@duiv> let's just wait? 16:28 < jef> I can't even access that thing when I'm logged in. 16:28 -!- anitagraser [3edaa47e@gateway/web/freenode/ip.62.218.164.126] has quit [Client Quit] 16:28 -!- anitagraser [3edaa47e@gateway/web/freenode/ip.62.218.164.126] has joined #qgis_meeting_150227 16:29 <@duiv> I have credentials on that server, but I cannot find logs as it is running in a docker container 16:29 <@duiv> I think 16:29 <@duiv> so let's just wait 16:29 <@duiv> next item? 16:29 < anitagraser> ok 16:29 <@duiv> docs 2.8? 16:30 < jef> I knew docker was the culprit :) 16:30 < anitagraser> Status 2.8 docs release (RD) 16:30 <@duiv> Maybe I should sent Otto an email and ask for some planning? 16:31 <@duiv> as soon as it is branched it takes me one day to have everything up and running 16:31 < anitagraser> sure would be good to know what the plan is 16:31 <@duiv> but I think we agreed on do a thorough 2.8 documentation and skip the other versions untill a new LTR 16:31 < anitagraser> yes, that's how i understood it 16:31 <@duiv> I'll do the email on the community list 16:32 < anitagraser> thanks! 16:32 <@duiv> Shops, 'official' opening? (RD) 16:32 <@duiv> I'll do an email to Bob and ask if the current shops can be made public 16:32 <@duiv> today I got my t-shirt :-) 16:32 <@duiv> XL is not very XL 16:32 < anitagraser> oh :( 16:32 < anitagraser> is the print ok? 16:33 <@duiv> is very much smell as acedic acid 16:33 < anitagraser> we could announce the shops with a picture of you in your t-shirt 16:33 < anitagraser> will have to see after first wash 16:33 <@duiv> looks a little rubberish, spraypaint or so 16:34 < anitagraser> they have different techniques for vector graphics but they cannot have gradients or shadows 16:34 < anitagraser> so those don't work with our logo 16:34 < anitagraser> if you send me a pic, i could blog about that too 16:34 <@duiv> ok, will do that. 16:35 < anitagraser> great! sorry, got to run now 16:35 <@duiv> and I'll ask Bob if it is OK if we make all shops public 16:35 < anitagraser> see you later. bye 16:35 <@duiv> bye 16:35 <@duiv> Credits for code contributors, guidelines (pcav) 16:35 -!- anitagraser [3edaa47e@gateway/web/freenode/ip.62.218.164.126] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 16:36 <@duiv> pcav: are you happy with how it is show in the visual changelog now? 16:37 <@duiv> or do you want to have it in another way? 16:38 <@duiv> http://i.imgur.com/ZsErE2u.png 16:38 < pcav> yes 16:39 < pcav> I think we can just announce it 16:39 < pcav> so contributors know how to do it 16:40 <@duiv> if you provide me the text, I'll put it in the website, 16:40 * duiv looking at a place for it 16:40 -!- gsherman [423aea55@gateway/web/freenode/ip.66.58.234.85] has joined #qgis_meeting_150227 16:40 <@duiv> hi Gary 16:41 < gsherman> hi 16:43 <@duiv> jef: I'm struglling to get current log for Gary, can you put it on paster or so? 16:44 < gsherman> sorry i'm late; been having too many late nights/early morning lately 16:44 <@duiv> ah working