[Board] Incubation <s>nightmare</s> question

Mon Jan 26 10:57:38 PST 2015

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Massimiliano,
thanks for the clarification.

Ha. This is becoming fun now.

All,
this is a totally unimportant mail. Please don't read if instead you
could code or do something useful instead. If you are dead bored, read on.

Wow, we are so old that we already managed to turn into a burocrazy. Ah,
never knew how to spell this word. Bureaucracy. Right. Why does it not
spell with a "z" like in "crazy in the bureau"? Anyway...

My understanding of how things work in OSGeo is a bit dated. Once upon a
time when we started most everything was done in the Wiki. People did it
because it needed to be done. Now there is some more formality with
raising a ticket to get stuff done but that is only there so things are
easier to track. Its not that because ticket 15 is stuck the world ends
or that you must file a ticket to report that the Wiki is down. If it is
down, report it.

Once I saw your complaint on istSOS I checked the Wiki and found that it
is not on the list of incubating projects:
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Incubation_Committee

Darn. What to do? Well, its a Wiki. Hit "Edit", fix it, close it. Now
istSOS is in incubation:
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Incubation_Committee

Woohoo, congratulations. Tweet.

If there is a formal need to get it approved then someone will
eventually point it out to me or you and we can fix accordingly. Maybe
necessary but not important to me. The important components of an
incubation process are all in place: There is a software, a team around
it, a representative to OSGeo (you) a mentor (me) and the Incubation
committee has heard about it. Now there is work to be done. Lets do it.

== Presentations ==
Since 2006 presentations about OSGeo and its projects pop up everywhere.
Initially with no CI at all. Later Tyler managed to extract a
presentation template form the (woohoo!) "Promotion and Visibility
Committee" and gave some guidance on the CI:
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Promotion_and_Visibility_Committee
Then VisCom mutated into the "Marketing Committee":
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Marketing_Committee

Somehow MarkCom appears to have died around April 2013 after years of
dormancy. Maybe it is in Coma. I don't know. I don't care because we
apparently we get things done without MarkCom.

Then Cameron started the OSGeo Live project and projects attached to it
because it seemed to be the right thing to do:
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Live

Now OSGeo Live can almost be seen as an "Incubation Indicator". If a
project wants to become an OSGeo graduated software it will first make
sure that it is on Live OSGeo. Because you don't even need to be
graduated to get there. Once there, chances that you will be mentioned
in presentations rises dramatically.

Still, there is no way to make everybody who talks about OSGeo mention
every graduated project. We (OSGeo) have no control over presentations.
And I don't think we should have any control because it would
dramatically reduce the number of OSGeo presentations we get to be given
all around the world.

So if you think that istSOS should be in OSGeo presentations then make
it easy for people to find it and maybe even to try to make it sexy [1]
so that people *want* to present it instead of "having to".

Lastly, I don't think that the Incubation Committee is broken. It is
working perfectly, just limited to the minimal required attention. Just
mention that MapServer is sued by Pear Inc. because they have a patent
on making pixel maps and you will sure get all the attention of the core
developers of MapServer and probably GDAL OGR too.

Just to demonstrate how well this committee functions (Daniel, Frank,
Steve, Howard, Cameron, All - please help me here!) I suggest that all
who have read to this point and agree with me that this is how things
work in OSGeo please answer something like:

"I will help find prior art of pixel map generation to defend MapServer
against Pear Inc."

Have fun,
Arnulf

[1] This mention of "sexy" is meant in a technical way describing the
attractiveness of source code, software architecture, UI design and
similar. The use of the word "sexy" is used in a non-pejorative way and
does not alienate either heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual or nonsexual
sentient beings.

Disclaimer: The rise of any other connotations of the word "sexy" in the
above context happens exclusively in the mind of the reader or listener
and does not fall under the responsibility of the original author.

Liability Exclusion: If you received this conversation as a member of
the OSGeo mailing list server and got into deep shit because of the
appearance of the word "sexy" in a work related mail we recommend you to
change your employer.

On 26.01.2015 16:08, Massimiliano Cannata wrote:
> Dear Arnulf, Cameron and All,
> I wrote this e-mail because I don't think istSOS is in incubation.
> 
> This is because:
> - i din't receive any confirmation from anybody about that
> - istSOS is not listed in the "incubating" projects
> - in all the presentations I saw that mentioned OSGeo projects and
> incubation project istSOS has been never mentioned
> 
> I think, that the board should vote on this. Am I wrong?
> 
> I didn't stress the mentor (Arnulf) because I think he will help me in
> achieve incubation requirements and improve the project, up to be able
> to graduate, eventually; not in bypassing forgetfulness or inattention
> in the procedure.
> 
> As soon as istSOS knows is in incubation, it might start to stress the
> Mentor to see what it miss (I believe a lot of things!!)
> 
> This mail "incubation nigthmare" was to underline that something is not
> working in the procedure of incubation.
> 
> Maybe istSOS will never be able to incubate, but at least starting would
> be a good point.
> 
> Maxi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Il giorno Mon Jan 26 2015 at 1:52:08 PM Seven (aka Arnulf)
> <seven at arnulf.us <mailto:seven at arnulf.us>> ha scritto:
> 
> Massimiliano,
> before calling all of Incubation a nightmare I would suggest to check
> what may have gone bad in your specific case. I am the assigned mentor
> for istSOS so ideally you should first contact me directly before
> frustrating all on this list, right?
> 
> 
> Your last mail to me dates from April 24 2014 [0] and the first thing
> you say is that you can easily retrieve a "code agreement" - but I have
> not yet seen this manifest anywhere. So how to proceed?
> 
> To me the most problematic section in the Incubation process of istSOS
> is the "Community Functioning". If you look at the Wiki web site [1]
> there are still quite a few "tba" (does that mean "to be added"?).
> Please add.
> 
> The IstSOS Provenance Review page [2] in the Wiki is still not populated
> at all. Please add.
> 
> Until those questions are answered I don't think that the project is
> ready to graduate.
> 
> 
> [later]
> Admittedly I was somewhat annoyed by your mail.
> 
> ...but now that I read maybe there has been a general misunderstanding.
> In my opinion IstSOS is already in incubation and I am just waiting for
> results. Rereading your mail it appears that you are still expecting
> some confirmation from the board level? Right?
> 
> 
> 
> In general projects seem to expect the mentor to do all the work to get
> their project through incubation. This is not so - at least not from my
> perspective which may obviously be wrong. In my understanding the mentor
> is there to help if there are process questions, recommend a way forward
> in a tricky situation and to make a pre-check of the status of the
> project to be able to recommend graduation.
> 
> 
> Which is what I tried to achieve with this mail. Did it work?
> 
> 
> Have fun,
> Arnulf
> 
> [0]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/__pipermail/incubator/2014-__April/002389.html <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/incubator/2014-April/002389.html>
> [1]
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/__IstSOS_Incubation_Status#__Community_Functioning
> <http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/IstSOS_Incubation_Status#Community_Functioning>
> [2] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/__IstSOS_Provenance_Review
> <http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/IstSOS_Provenance_Review>
> 
> 
> On 24.01.2015 17:58, Massimiliano Cannata wrote:
>> Dear incubation committee,
>> I'm embarassed in writing this email...
> 
>> but after a very very long waiting I have to complain for the
> treatment
>> the istsos software is receiving.
> 
>> Is the same for all the software or just this project is not
> considered?
> 
>> Almost one year ago I apply for entering incubation, the committee
> asks
>> me to follow the procedure with form.. Then ticket.. And I fill
> everything.
> 
>> The committee said we need a mentor, Arnulf volunteered,  and the
>> committee, I think, voted approving istsos to pass in incubation.
> 
>> Then?.... Nothing... And one year is passed!
> 
>> I think the committee shall make a motion to the board to approve the
>> decision, but it never happened.
> 
>> The result? Istsos is not in incubation: not in the website nor in any
>> talk I have followed.
> 
>> Why making a motion is so difficult?
> 
>> If this is the treatment for new software approaching our community I
>> believe something does not work at all!
> 
>> I know people are volunteer and not paid,  but the welcome steps are
>> minimal: reading a page, vote, and make a motion.
> 
>> If we get stack here, and after several remainders from my side,
> this is
>> really discouraging.
> 
>> Sorry for this email.
> 
>> Massimiliano
> 
> 
> 
>> _________________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Board at lists.osgeo.org>
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/__mailman/listinfo/board
> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>
> 
> 
> 
> 

- -- 
Exploring Nothing
http://arnulf.us
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlTGjiIACgkQXmFKW+BJ1b2ungCaA+auv7fcpw0UUXwG6A2zjAEW
JhQAn2RGIFdHedXCV5AL+undG6MIYVN9
=QKbT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----