[Board] discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

Wed Aug 2 06:43:13 PDT 2017

I think, I have repeated my stand and clearly stated my views.

The only way I see out of the present situation is to rollback
and continue with the three category model including
"OSGeo Project", "OSGeo Project in Incubation" and
"OSGeo Community (Project)". This will be a entail
redesign of three logos at [1] to celebrate the great work
being done in under the above three categories.

Any change in project categorization would entail a vote
from the board and consultation with PSC (especially
for the projects presently under incubation).

I am loaded with work at the university and will be
slow in communication till next 2 weeks.

Wish you all a great time at FOSS4G-Boston.

Best

Venka

[1] 
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Community_Projects#Comparison_with_Incubation

On 8/2/2017 8:46 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> Thanks Cameron, you are doing a better job of communicating this one then
> me.
>
> Venkas observation is valid - that it is a surprise to PSC members (and
> board members) that a "Project in Incubation" badge is not available. As
> committee chair it is my responsible to communicate with the board, I tend
> to focus significant items - like the recent graduation.
>
> For incubation you touch on an important idea - that the incubation process
> is there to help the project teams improve. Any advertising or visibility
> benefit is a distraction from this goal (and in some cases has proved
> harmful).
>
> I also want to focus on the new OSGeo Community project category - it is an
> exciting idea that allows OSGeo to support and promote far more software
> projects. If we have project teams being disappointed about taking part as
> a community project it may serve to discourage involvement and outreach.
>
> The conversation with Helena is also important - the commitment of the
> project teams should be acknowledged. One of our foundation goals, to
> increase participation, was to do a better job of celebrating
> participation. Having project teams being proud of their participation and
> commitment is a good thing - so if a badge can help acknowledge this fact
> then it may yet serve a purpose.
>
> Finally we have mounting reports of projects not staying on target with
> respect osgeo project expectations. This is a responsibility that should be
> debated at the board level, leaving board members (myself included) a
> pressing matter to attend to - see meeting minuets for action items:
> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Face_to_Face_Meeting_Paris_2017#3._OSGeo_project_status
>
>
>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
> On 1 August 2017 at 14:17, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> OSGeo Board,
>>
>> Re: the level of advertising provided to projects in incubation.
>>
>> I'm concerned that a board member has requested a concept about incubation
>> be taken to the Board email list, rather than Board members with an opinion
>> offering to join and help the incubation list.
>>
>> I'm concerned for a number of reasons:
>>
>> 1. The OSGeo Incubation committee has had problems getting projects to
>> move through incubation, which is significantly sucking up volunteer
>> resources. This was/is a significant problem threatening the effectiveness
>> of incubation. After much debate on the incubation list, it was resolved
>> collectively and transparently that reducing the advertising value of
>> "being in incubation" would provide encouragement for projects to keep
>> moving through.
>>
>> 2. Board members are welcome to join OSGeo committees are contribute to
>> conversations. The time to comment on incubation issues is when it is being
>> debated at the committee level. Note, that opinions hold much greater
>> weight if they are backed up by the commitment to implement the opinion.
>> This is the principle of a Do-ocracy.
>>
>> 3. If the board wishes to enable their communities, they should trust the
>> communities and back the community decisions. Over-riding decisions of a
>> community at a higher level is a significant demotivator. It is a
>> dis-empowerment of communities and will long term lead to the
>> dis-engagement of communities.
>>
>> 4. The recent conversation thread on the board list has not offered a
>> solution as to how to solve the incubation committee problem of projects
>> not progressing to completion. Note, a suggestion along the lines of
>> "someone else should do ..." doesn't count as a solution.
>>
>> --
>>
>> With regards to the level of advertising we give to "OSGeo Projects in
>> Incubation", I agree with the Incubation committee's decision (as explained
>> by Jody), that we should reduce the value provided by "being in incubation"
>> which increases the value of "being incubated".
>>
>> We should be helping new users find quality incubated projects. You can
>> think of it as a quality star rating if you like. Advertising that a
>> project is "in incubation" implies a level of quality that has not yet been
>> earned.
>>
>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>
>> On 2/8/17 2:24 am, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>
>> On 1 August 2017 at 09:07, Venkatesh Raghavan <
>> raghavan at media.osaka-cu.ac.jp> wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/2/2017 12:51 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>>
>>>> Venka they are visible as community projects on the website and our
>>>> promotion.
>>>>
>>> Jody Community projects and "projects in incubation" were different and
>>> are listed
>>> as such on our present website. The decision to put them together (as a
>>> part of
>>> re-branding) was neither informed to or approved by the board.
>>>
>>> All project in incubation can display on their project leaflet and
>>> website they
>>> they are striving to graduate as an OSGeo project and undergoing our
>>> software vetting process.
>>
>> Joining incubation reflects on the project team and their wishes, their
>> commitment as a team to the OSGeo community.
>>
>> The branding associated with OSGeo Project reflects the result.  The
>> branding associated with OSGeo community also reflects a result.
>>
>>
>>
>> Venka is there any reason for projects that are in our incubation process
>>>> to be considered for more visibility then our community projects?
>>>>
>>> Jody I never talked about more visibility or less. I said that Project in
>>> Incubation
>>> must be shown as such with appropriate logo.
>>>
>> And I am asking you to consider why - what are you trying to communicate
>> with an Incubation logo and to whom?
>>
>> aside: "Incubation" logo, "Project in Incubation" would be too long,
>>
>>
>>> Why? Because they are taking steps to graduate as OSGeo projects and
>>> because
>>> that is how it was before changes were made without information or
>>> approval from the board.
>>
>> We can discuss the responsibilities of the incubation committee and of the
>> board if you like.
>>
>>
>>> Even the PSC of project under incubation were not informed about this.
>>
>> Venka you are appealing to process - as such we can always do a better job
>> communicating it is true:
>> a) I have started this email thread here with the board
>> b) I have started an email thread on the incubation list to communicate
>> with project teams
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jody Garnett
>>>>
>>>> On 1 August 2017 at 08:49, Venkatesh Raghavan <
>>>> raghavan at media.osaka-cu.ac.jp
>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> ....
>>>>> On 8/2/2017 12:44 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
>>>>> of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
>>>>> how it was approved.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The categorization has not changed, these projects are part of the
>>>>> incubation process.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then let us  continue to use the "OSGeo Incubation logo" and provide
>>>>> visibility to our projects in incubation.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Board mailing listBoard at lists.osgeo.orghttps://
>>>>> lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing listBoard at lists.osgeo.orghttps://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cameron Shorter
>> M +61 419 142 254 <+61%20419%20142%20254>
>>
>>