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

[Venkatesh Raghavan]

Comments below;

On 8/1/2017 11:17 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> I am staring a new thread so the marketing committee can focus on the
> printing deadline for boston.
>
> Projects are starting to update to the new branding which is great - we
> have two branding available:
>
> - https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/tree/master/incubation/project
> - https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/tree/master/incubation/community
>
> Projects that are part of our incubation process fall under community
> projects, they have met our standards for being open source, spatial and
> participatory and are being promoted as part of our foundation along side
> their fellow community projects pgrouting and geowebcache.
> .
> For reference the prior branding is here
> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Community_Projects#Comparison_with_Incubation

I propose the continued use of the same branding shown in the URL
above with projects categorized as "OSGeo Project", "OSGeo Incubation 
Project" and "OSGeo Community Project".

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.

Best

Venka

>
> The larger story is the focus not on our foundation, but on the software
> projects and outreach.
>
> * As such the incubation process is no longer called out on our website (or
> in our branding) because it does not have any significance to website
> visitors. Incubation is an internal process of our software foundation - it
> does not earn its keep introducing a "third branding" if we cannot explain
> succinctly what it actually means for potential users of the software.
>
> * The board introduced the idea of community projects in response to a call
> to be more inclusive and allow innovation
>
> * Including more projects in our community does not detract from the
> projects that were already in our community. We are doing more for software
> projects at OSGeo to help everyone.
>
> We have been avoiding a difficult conversation on osgeo project quality on
> and off since January. At our most recent F2F meeting we took some action
> items to hear a report from Maxi and Jeff McKenna (in Boston? details still
> be arranged). The question of what we have to offer community projects and
> osgeo projects, and what we expect in return, should be considered in one
> go to be fair to everyone.
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>