[OSGeo-Edu] Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Training and certification
Bob.Basques at ci.stpaul.mn.us
Mon Jun 13 07:54:50 PDT 2011
My thoughts on the Incubation process (which are in the archives over the years) was generally that it was too big a step in many cases for projects to take. I've always wondered about some sort of process that could last much longer and with many more steps in it before being declared fully matured. I've also wondered a bit about how to monitor these matured projects after the back. It seems like smaller certification steps/chunks could help here as well. You wouldn't need to require a full review of the whoile incubation process for example.
This allows the community much more time to feel out and discuss a project and it's workings as well as an opportunity to guide the process where possible. The all or nothing option of the Incubation process has bothered me from day one. It also allows for at least, a rudimentary (public) history to be captured of a projects as it's developed.
>>> Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com> wrote:
Interaction with other committees is separate to the the incubation process currently.
I like the idea of the straight up reward system:
- participation (provision of quick start etc gets you included on the live dvd)
- provision of course materials perhaps could allow projects to participate in education initiatives
The incubation process is already a MASSIVE ask. Just because it is one that has had some success please do not look at it as an opportunity to ask more from participating projects.
As an example: "incubation" took GeoTools years to accomplish - and is taking many other projects years as well. Please don't add more work to a process already so slow is is ineffective.
Is there any way to start these conversations off in the other direct? That is how can the live dvd project bring assistance to bear; or the education committee bring volunteers together to write course materials?
Remember that these projects have one (and only one primary objective): bringing code together into releasable form :-)
On Sunday, 12 June 2011 at 10:56 AM, Mark Lucas wrote:
On Jun 11, 2011, at 8:24 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
Yes I agree that OSGeo-Live also provides a good framework for the periodic review of projects beyond incubation.
What we have on our side is:
1. A periodic release schedule
2. A valuable business driver which attracts projects to continue to work on OSGeo-Live (namely the marketing value of each release)
We do have the potential to gradually introduce review of incubation criteria into the OSGeo-Live release cycle.
I was actually thinking of the reverse - incubation graduation would be contingent on getting on the OSGeo-Live disk. Agree it should be gradual, should start out as a goal.
Discuss mailing list
Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Discuss