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

Wed Aug 2 13:55:03 PDT 2017

Hi Venka,

I hear that you feel strongly about a matter. Your passion is noted and 
valuable. Others have spoken with equal conviction to the contrary. The 
other (standard) way to resolve a disagreement is to initiate a vote.

Insisting on a course of action without a vote sounds quite 
authoritarian, and contrary to the principles of open source and democracy.

If you wish to change something, I suggest initiating a vote. If related 
to incubation, or to marketing, I suggest those communities should be 
involved in the voting process.

Warm regards, Cameron

On 2/8/17 11:43 pm, Venkatesh Raghavan 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

-- 
Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254