I agree with Gio and I was curious as to why some bugs are funded but not reviewing. Reviewing can help prevent some bugs and has also the potential to improve a PR.
I'd also say that improving the review pace will help losing PR to stalebot. In my eyes bugfix are crucial, but new features are also important, and those seem to require more time to review. New features also help promote QGIS and compete against other software. Funding could be done like bugs or like grants, with or without a selection process. This would help competent devs to devote more of their time to reviewing. Alex Le ven. 9 avr. 2021 à 12:42, Giovanni Manghi <[email protected]> a écrit : > Hi all, > > > > 2. we may have a (partially paid?) role for the review manager, to go > > through the PR queue, ping people for reviews, etc. > > Has this been considered/discussed (having 1 or more paid reviewers)? > > At very least this seems a reasonable solution until we are not able > to bring in more reviewers. > > cheers > > -- G -- > _______________________________________________ > QGIS-Developer mailing list > [email protected] > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >
_______________________________________________ QGIS-Developer mailing list [email protected] List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
