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

Marc Vloemans marcvloemans1 at gmail.com
Wed Aug 2 12:29:40 PDT 2017 

All,

From a communications point of view:
- OSGeo is far better off celebrating and promoting successes
- if 'projects in incubation' have gained more traction by/value from that previous badge, I am interested in learning so
- if no value has been derived, it is time to try something new...even success is not guaranteed


Kind regards,
Marc Vloemans


> Op 2 aug. 2017 om 18:46 heeft Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> I think I have also (with a bit of help) clearly state my view.
> 
> Venka with due respect I will be guided by feedback form the incubation list and the projects in incubation on this.
> 
> Thank you for this discussion.
> 
> --
> Jody Garnett
> 
>> On 2 August 2017 at 06:43, Venkatesh Raghavan <raghavan at media.osaka-cu.ac.jp> wrote:
>> 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>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/attachments/20170802/6fa1f45d/attachment.htm>

More information about the Board mailing list