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

Wed Aug 2 16:47:26 PDT 2017

Hi Cameron,

On 8/3/2017 5:55 AM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> 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.

A vote is what I have been requesting since the beginning of this thread.

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

The adjectives you have used above, describe better a situation when
decision are taken unilaterally without informing the parties concerned
(as is the case with changing project categorization).
>
> 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.

I am not the one who is suggesting to "change" something.
I am most happy with the way things were before they
got changed.

Venka
>
> 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
>