[OSGeo-Discuss] Incubator Sponsor idea.

[Stephen Woodbridge]

An other thought on this might be a some kind of OSGeo "contrib" project 
that is more focused on collecting projects likes Bob's into a common 
repository with the hope that making these public might allow some of 
them to spin-off into full blown OSGeo projects if there is enough 
interest and community need for it.

This would not give the code OSGeo stamp of approval, but would just be 
a holding place for potentially interesting code related to other OSGeo 
projects that people might want to be able access and helps to prevent 
potential gems from getting lost.

My guess is that it would still need some kind of PSC to decide what is 
the gate to let things in and to make sure that the basic minimal stuff 
required for entrance is done and to encourge others to pick and run 
with ideas and spin-offs of the code being held. Something like this 
would need to minimally have any code contributed assign its copyright 
to OSGeo and state that it was infringement free or something like that.

Something to think about.

-Steve W

Bob Basques wrote:
> 
> Jody,
>  
> I was thinking about a bit more separation in functionality than you 
> describe, but it seems like the same process could work.
>  
> I guess I'm trying to figure out a way to let smaller projects in the 
> door, and let the mainstay project leaders decide if the smaller 
> projects have enough merit to nurture further or not.
>  
> I have  a few different things I've put together that use MapServer as a 
> service, but they are all seemingly small project.  As an example, I 
> have a Raster distribution service based on MapServer that we use to 
> populate our engineering AutoCAD sessions, it's really just some 
> specialized scripting in the AutoCAD instance, but I'm sure there are 
> folks out there that would re-use if I put it out as a project.  I would 
> just barely have the time to put together a basic how-to for something 
> like this and publish it, but it wouldn't get much in the way of support 
> focus because of my own time constraints.  I have something similar for 
> Google ion the Works, as well as Sketchup sessions.  These smaller 
> projects have all had great success here internally, and are all built 
> as standalone services so they can be mixed and matched as the business 
> needs require.
>  
> Some might argue that they are all one thing, while other might want 
> them to remain separated.  Anyway, just some more thoughts on the subject.
>  
> bobb
>  
> 
> 
>  >>> Jody Garnett <jgarnett at refractions.net> wrote:
> Hi Bob; you will find that a few of the open source projects nurture new
> talent this way.
> 
> The GeoTools library has the facilities in place to allow new developers
> to come online and start an "unsupported" module with the support of the
> community. Each module in GeoTools is an entire project (often making
> use of the same interfaces and so forth).  When a module meets the QA
> requirements it can be included in the GeoTools download for the general
> public.
> 
> Is this what you had in mind?
> 
> I understand that some something similar to Jakarta is often requested
> from the OSGeo foundation. Thus far the incubation committee has been
> really focused on getting existing projects through our incubation
> process (and defining what the expectations are for such projects).
> 
> Jody
> 
> Bob Basques wrote:
>  > All,
>  > I have a question about a possible way to get some smaller projects
>  > into the system without the requirements of going full bore (as I
>  > perceive it now)  I'm not really targeting any project per se at this
>  > point, but . . .
>  > 
>  > What about have a "Super" project that can act as a sponsor for a
>  > smaller project.  When I say smaller, I mean where there might only be
>  > one, two or three developers.  The end result being that the "Super"
>  > project basically vouches for the smaller project in some fashion for
>  > it to get some sort of OSGEO stamp applied to it.   This could
>  > possibly be a criteria where some of the established vetting is
>  > handled via a voucher system, where other "Super" projects can add
>  > their credentials to the mix over time.
>  > 
>  > Just a thought, still a little muddled too, but it seems like there
>  > might be something workable in the concept.  Any other thoughts?
>  > 
>  > bobb
>  > 
>  > 
>  > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > Discuss mailing list
>  > Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>  > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>  >  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss