Thanks Cameron that looks great.<div><br></div><div>The only thing I am tempted to do is:</div><div>* Either: Place all the "italics" clarifying the intent at the end of each section - or isolate them into a FAQ. This would make the page more of a checklist; and give us an avenue for further clarification in the future.</div>
<div>* Or: Double check that all examples are marked in italics</div><div><br></div><div>For now I will double check all examples are in italics; and await your feedback about taking the clarifications out of line with the main checklist.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Jody</div><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 7:27 AM, Cameron Shorter <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:cameron.shorter@gmail.com">cameron.shorter@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
I've updated the draft "Project Graduation Checklist", in line with
comments from the last incom meeting.<br>
If anyone has any outstanding comments on this document, can you
please say so.<br>
I'd like to see it approved at the next Incom meeting.<br>
<br>
Latest draft here:<br>
<a href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php?title=Draft_Project_Graduation_Checklist_Draft&oldid=61029" target="_blank">http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php?title=Draft_Project_Graduation_Checklist_Draft&oldid=61029</a><br>
<br>
Diffs to last review:<br>
<a href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php?title=Draft_Project_Graduation_Checklist_Draft&action=historysubmit&diff=61029&oldid=59953" target="_blank">http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php?title=Draft_Project_Graduation_Checklist_Draft&action=historysubmit&diff=61029&oldid=59953</a><br>
<br>
My notes against the meeting logs below:<br>
<br>
13:34:51 jgarnett: Back to agenda .. 4 ) Graduation
Checklist - review and approve<br>
13:35:00 jgarnett: Readable copy here:
<a href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Draft_Project_Graduation_Checklist_Draft" target="_blank">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Draft_Project_Graduation_Checklist_Draft</a><br>
13:35:01 sigq: Title: Draft Project Graduation Checklist
Draft - OSGeo Wiki ( at <a href="http://wiki.osgeo.org" target="_blank">wiki.osgeo.org</a> )<br>
13:35:19 jgarnett: Can I ask if anyone has had a chance to
review this? ( Or the earlier red shifted version )<br>
13:35:46 pspencer_: minor comments: the Intellectual
Property section first sentence makes no sense with the bullets that
follow?<br>
13:36:50 jgarnett: let me try and keep up<br>
13:37:22 jgarnett: pspencer_: The first sentence is about
all that made sence to me ( that is the reason we are checking; to
ensure we are able to release )<br>
13:37:39 jgarnett: under processes the bullet points are
supposed to describe what we look for in the developer guide<br>
<br>
Pagameba has corrected:<br>
"We need to ensure that project owns or otherwise has obtained the
ability to release:"<br>
to:<br>
"We need to ensure that project owns or otherwise has obtained the
ability to release <ins>the
project code by completing the following steps</ins>:"<br>
<br>
13:35:56 : * FrankW_ has reviewed.<br>
13:36:08 pspencer_: under processes, should the last two
bullets be numbers instead?<br>
<br>
CameronShorter: I'd like to see a list like:<br>
1. xxx<br>
2. xxx<br>
3. xxx<br>
3.1 xxx<br>
3.2 xxx<br>
<br>
Howerver, unless we hard code the list numbers, media wiki only
allows:<br>
1. xxx<br>
2. xxx<br>
3. xxx<br>
1. xxx<br>
2. xxx<br>
<br>
I think this second option is not very good, hence rolling back to
lists of:<br>
1. xxx<br>
2. xxx<br>
3. xxx<br>
*. xxx<br>
*. xxx<br>
<br>
pspencer, if you fell strongly enough about this to push for a
change, then feel free to suggest your preference.<br>
<br>
13:36:21 jsanz: the intellectual property point 4 makes not
a lot of sense to me<br>
13:36:53 FrankW_: I agree with jsanz that IP point 4 should
be struck<br>
13:38:22 jgarnett: jsanz: Apache retains the ability for the
their foundation to shut off downloads in the event a legal
complaint is made; this is to prevent an escalating damages
calculation and to show the ability of acting in good faith.<br>
13:38:41 jgarnett: ( not saying I like that; just that is
something to consider in terms of protecting the foundations …
a$$sets )<br>
13:38:49 FrankW_: I don't see any need for a project to do
something in advance to enable this.<br>
13:39:02 FrankW_: If something comes up then reasonable
efforts would be made to withdraw downloads.<br>
13:39:10 jsanz: they mean shut off THEIR download servers,
right?<br>
13:39:46 jgarnett: FrankW: I think the check about downloads
is more to have a procedure in place.<br>
13:40:03 pspencer_: sounds like documenting how the project
will deal with blocking legal issues is needed<br>
13:40:10 FrankW_: I am not aware of any project with an
a-priori procedure in place nor do I see any special need for this.<br>
13:40:17 jgarnett: jsanz: In case you are wondering; we
*did* have this happen during the geoTools review ( we found we were
distributing some jars we were not allowed to and had to withdraw
several years with of downloads )<br>
13:40:53 jgarnett: FrankW: I would be fine with removing it;
it is really about the board's expectations.<br>
<br>
In line with discussion above, and because I agree with sentement,
the following has been removed:<br>
"# The project has the ability to shut off downloads if a blocking
legal issue is found."<br>
<br>
13:36:22 jgarnett: heh<br>
13:36:26 pspencer_: typo in Processes #2 ( > at end of
sentence )<br>
13:36:47 jgarnett: Some typos may be me trying to reduce the
document to readable form ...<br>
<br>
Fixed by Pagameba<br>
<br>
<br>
13:37:55 FrankW_: I actually also do not think there should
be any discussion of checking for patents.<br>
13:39:19 jgarnett: FrankW: I agree the patent check is
bullshit; you need lots of money to do that; and I don't want to see
that in a checklist unless the foundation is hiring professionals to
do the check.<br>
<br>
CameronShorter: The patent check line is not in our last 1.0 version
of this document. So already incubated projects will not have passed
this criteria. I agree it should be removed.<br>
<br>
Removed: "# The project has checked for inappropriate use of
trademark or patents and the results of such checks have been
documented."<br>
<br>
<br>
13:42:01 jgarnett: Thinking: I am not really keen on having
a shared editing session ( since this is supposed to be a meeting )<br>
13:42:17 jgarnett: Suffice to say I think the document is
not ready; and I don't think we can make it ready in the next 20
mins.<br>
13:42:29 pspencer_: agreed<br>
13:42:47 jgarnett: With that in mind; could we continue with
our meeting. And if people are keen we can return to editing
roulette.<br>
13:42:57 FrankW_: ok<br>
13:42:58 jsanz: yes, but I think is pretty good as is<br>
13:43:01 jsanz: ok<br>
<br>
On 10/02/12 10:28, Jody Garnett wrote:
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>The response was very positive! You can check the IRC log...</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> We could not approve it in the meeting as: </div>
<div>a) Although I tried to isolate it into a single readable
page; there were still typos.</div>
<div>b) People were still confused about IP checks; and pushed
back about the ability to shut off code (basically an apache
thing we can choose to ignore)</div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Rather then watch them edit line by line; we proceeded with
the rest of the meeting agenda.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If you want to ask the same question on the incubator list;
we can fix the typos; and line up the IP section with the
reality of a volunteer driven organisation. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-- </div>
<div>Jody Garnett<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<p style="color:#a0a0a8">On Friday, 10 February 2012 at 6:02 AM,
Cameron Shorter wrote:</p>
<blockquote type="cite" style="border-left-style:solid;border-width:1px;margin-left:0px;padding-left:10px">
<span>
<div>
<div>
<div>Hi Jody,</div>
<div>What were the results of the last incubation
committee meeting?</div>
<div>In particular, I'm interested to know where we are up
to with:</div>
<div><a href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Project_Graduation_Checklist" target="_blank">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Project_Graduation_Checklist</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>What still needs to be done to get it approved?</div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-- </div>
<div>Cameron Shorter</div>
<div>Geospatial Solutions Manager</div>
<div>Tel: <a href="tel:%2B61%20%280%292%208570%205050" value="+61285705050" target="_blank">+61 (0)2 8570 5050</a></div>
<div>Mob: <a href="tel:%2B61%20%280%29419%20142%20254" value="+61419142254" target="_blank">+61 (0)419 142 254</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Think Globally, Fix Locally</div>
<div>Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and
Open Source</div>
<div><a href="http://www.lisasoft.com" target="_blank">http://www.lisasoft.com</a></div>
</font></span></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
</font></span></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
</font></span></span><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"> </font></span></blockquote><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<div> <br>
</div>
</font></span></blockquote><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<br>
<br>
<pre cols="72">--
Cameron Shorter
Geospatial Solutions Manager
Tel: <a href="tel:%2B61%20%280%292%208570%205050" value="+61285705050" target="_blank">+61 (0)2 8570 5050</a>
Mob: <a href="tel:%2B61%20%280%29419%20142%20254" value="+61419142254" target="_blank">+61 (0)419 142 254</a>
Think Globally, Fix Locally
Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source
<a href="http://www.lisasoft.com" target="_blank">http://www.lisasoft.com</a>
</pre>
</font></span></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>