<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" data-hsystem="true"></head>
<body><style>p{margin: 0;padding: 0;}
</style>
<p>+1</p>
<p> </p>
<p><br>On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 07:28:36 +1100, Cameron Shorter
<cameron.shorter@gmail.com> wrote:</p>
<blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid #000000; padding-right: 0px;
padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 0px;">Hi Massimo,<br> I also
agree that a review process is in order. I'd actually extend to <br> suggest
that a development process should be described as well, and that <br> we should
align with existing OSGeo-Live documentation processes.<br><br> Ie, we should be
able to find Notebook processes linked from here:<br>
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc#Documentation<br><br> I also think
that we should describe the processes in the OSGeo-Live <br> wiki (which uses
media wiki) rather than a git wiki. This is to ensure <br> consistency with the
rest of OSGeo-Live. Although I'm open to being <br> convinced otherwise if there
are strong advantages to using a git wiki.<br><br> I'd suggest following a
similar style to the Quickstart guide:<br>
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Add_Project#Application_Quick_Start<br> For
example, create a template Notebook, with comments, that someone <br> else can
follow to create a new Quickstart.<br><br> I see our weak point from an
OSGeo-Live project's point of view is <br> sourcing a person or people willing
to provide detailed review of the <br> Notebooks.<br> In particular, it is a
significant time sink reviewing documentation to <br> ensure it has well formed,
concise English, at the standard of a <br> technical text book. (This is the
standard we have been targeting so <br> far, and I believe Notebooks should also
be required to meet this standard).<br> I'd guess that about 60% of time of
creating a good notebook would be in <br> writing code, 40% in describing
it.<br><br> Massimo, for context, your docs are quite good, but I'd estimate
that <br> they would be ~ 10% to 20% of your effort would be required to review
<br> the docs to our current standards. Reviewing the English in your <br>
Quickstart took me 3 to 4 hours, and that didn't include running any of <br> the
steps.<br><br> Sourcing someone with good English writing skills to write
Notebooks <br> will help the review process a lot.<br><br> Cheers,
Cameron<br><br> On 15/03/2016 5:08 am, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:<br> > Hi
Massimo,<br> ><br> > I agree that we need a review process for all
notebooks (not just GSoC).<br> ><br> > +1<br> > Angelos<br> ><br>
> On 03/14/2016 01:11 AM, massimo di stefano wrote:<br> >> From the
discussion we had so far it is clear to me we need a <br> >> *official
revision procedure* to have the work done for the GSoC <br> >> integrated
into the live.<br> >><br> >> I agreed in “hiding” the jupyter
notebook, and so the GSoC work, <br> >> from this release of the Live,<br>
>> in favor of a transparent public commitment to review the efforts
done.<br> >><br> >> IMHO the spreadsheet approach we use for project
review doesn’t apply <br> >> very well in this context.<br> >> To
facilitate keeping track of the review and facilitate potential <br> >>
new contributors,<br> >> I propose to open a motion in accepting the use
of github <br> >> checklist+issue tracker to keep track of the review
process.<br> >><br> >> I started this page, which should help in
making this possible:<br> >><br> >>
https://github.com/epifanio/OSGeoLive-Notebooks/wiki/Notebook-review <br>
>>
<https://github.com/epifanio/OSGeoLive-Notebooks/wiki/Notebook-review>
<https://github.com/epifanio/OSGeoLive-Notebooks/wiki/Notebook-review <br>
>>
<https://github.com/epifanio/OSGeoLive-Notebooks/wiki/Notebook-review>><br>
>><br> >> We can improve it making it more clear, but should give
you the idea.<br> >><br> >> This motion is to validate the work done
during GSoC, which is:<br> >><br> >> “Development of educational
material in the form of interactive <br> >> notebooks”<br> >><br>
>> and to help the coordination between potential contributors for this
<br> >> specific topic.<br> >><br> >><br> >><br>
>> Here it is my +1<br> >><br> >><br> >> Cheers,<br>
>> Massimo.<br> >><br> >><br> ><br> ><br><br> -- <br>
Cameron Shorter,<br> Software and Data Solutions Manager<br> LISAsoft<br> Suite
112, Jones Bay Wharf,<br> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009<br><br> P +61 2
9009 5000, W www.lisasoft.com, F +61 2 9009 5099<br><br>
_______________________________________________<br> Live-demo mailing list<br>
Live-demo@lists.osgeo.org<br>
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/live-demo<br> http://live.osgeo.org<br>
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc<br>
</blockquote>
<p><br><br></p>
<p><br> --<br>Brian M Hamlin<br> OSGeo California Chapter<br>
blog.light42.com<br></p>
<p> </p>
</body>
</html>