[OSGeo-Discuss] New incubation procedure
Daniel Morissette
dmorissette at mapgears.com
Thu Mar 5 11:57:50 PST 2015
I'm not sure I like diluting the "Incubated Project" status by turning
it into a star rating in which incubated and non-incubated projects are
mixed.
Incubated projects have taken steps to review their code and adjust
their way to operate to meet several requirements, and just a set of
stars do not relay that properly to the outside world.
That being said, I have no alternative name to offer for the "OSGeo
Labs" pre-incubation status at the moment, so I'll stay out of the debate.
Daniel
On 2015-03-05 5:52 AM, Bart van den Eijnden wrote:
> Or you’re saying you want to address this with the stars system? So 1
> star for existing labs projects for instance?
>
> Jody, as chair of the incubation committee, what’s your take on this?
>
> Best regards,
> Bart
>
>> On 05 Mar 2015, at 11:51, Bart van den Eijnden <bartvde at osgis.nl
>> <mailto:bartvde at osgis.nl>> wrote:
>>
>> I don’t think you can put projects that have gone through incubation
>> and the projects that still have to incubate at the same level. But
>> that’s my opinion only.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Bart
>>
>>> On 05 Mar 2015, at 11:18, Jachym Cepicky <jachym.cepicky at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:jachym.cepicky at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Guys,
>>>
>>> I think you are trying to find a term for something, I would like to
>>> get rid of. "OSGeo Project" is, what I would like to achieve for both
>>> - today's projects and labs together under one hat.
>>>
>>> Or anybody thinks completely different?
>>>
>>> Just my $.02
>>> J
>>>
>>> čt 5. 3. 2015 v 9:08 odesílatel Suchith Anand
>>> <Suchith.Anand at nottingham.ac.uk
>>> <mailto:Suchith.Anand at nottingham.ac.uk>> napsal:
>>>
>>> Yes, i think "Incubator Projects" is an appropriate name for this.
>>>
>>> Vaclav - Is this ok for you?
>>>
>>> Suchith
>>> __________________________________________
>>> From: Bart van den Eijnden [bartvde at osgis.nl
>>> <mailto:bartvde at osgis.nl>]
>>> Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 7:34 AM
>>> To: Vaclav Petras
>>> Cc: Suchith Anand; discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>> <mailto:discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] New incubation procedure
>>>
>>> I agree Community Projects is a confusing name.
>>>
>>> What about incubator projects? That’s the term that Apache uses.
>>>
>>> http://incubator.apache.org <http://incubator.apache.org/>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Bart
>>>
>>> On 04 Mar 2015, at 23:25, Vaclav Petras <wenzeslaus at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:wenzeslaus at gmail.com><mailto:w__enzeslaus at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:wenzeslaus at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Suchith Anand
>>> <Suchith.Anand at nottingham.ac.__uk
>>> <mailto:Suchith.Anand at nottingham.ac.uk><mailto:Suchith.Anand at __nottingham.ac.uk
>>> <mailto:Suchith.Anand at nottingham.ac.uk>>> wrote:
>>> Thanks Jeff.
>>>
>>> Though we had lots of discussions afterwards and continuing on
>>> this , we couldnt find any solution till now. So this might be a
>>> good opportunity to modify the Incubation's "labs" term, to
>>> something like "Community Projects" to avoid confusion if that is
>>> acceptable to Vaclav, Jachym and others. Many thanks.
>>>
>>> Well, I'm not particularly fond of "Community Projects" as a
>>> name. Even mature FOSS projects are community projects in one way
>>> or the other. Unfortunately, I don't have other suggestion.
>>>
>>> Vaclav
>>>
>>> Suchith
>>>
>>> __________________________________________
>>> From: discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.__org
>>> <mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org><mailto:discuss-bounces at __lists.osgeo.org
>>> <mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org>>
>>> [discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.__org
>>> <mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org><mailto:discuss-bounces at __lists.osgeo.org
>>> <mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org>>] On Behalf Of Jeff
>>> McKenna [jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com
>>> <mailto:jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>__<mailto:jmckenna at __gatewaygeomatics.com
>>> <mailto:jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>>]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 2:26 PM
>>> To: discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>> <mailto:discuss at lists.osgeo.org><__mailto:discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>> <mailto:discuss at lists.osgeo.org>__>
>>> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] New incubation procedure
>>>
>>> (we are approaching 2 full years that this "labs" naming has been an
>>> issue and discussed[1])
>>>
>>> Today, knowing how ingrained the term 'lab' is in the GeoForAll
>>> education network, maybe Jachym is correct that it is a good time to
>>> modify the Incubation's "labs" term, to something like "Community
>>> Projects".
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/__pipermail/ica-osgeo-labs/2013-__June/000134.html
>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/ica-osgeo-labs/2013-June/000134.html>
>>>
>>> -jeff
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2015-03-03 3:42 AM, Suchith Anand wrote:
>>> > Vaclav,
>>> >
>>> > Please accept my sincere apologies as it was my mistake that i
>>> did not think on this when we started the ICA-OSGeo Labs
>>> initiative (so many things were going on at that time!).
>>> >
>>> > In universities, we generally use the "Labs" term to refer to
>>> infrastructure/people/__facilities for a particular subject. For
>>> example Botany Lab, Robotics Lab etc. And we wanted to make sure
>>> there is a dedicated Open Source Geospatial Lab in universities
>>> worldwide (which includes bringing together people from various
>>> disciplines, infrastructure (the physical space) and facilities
>>> to make this happen. Also it is easier to make use of the same
>>> terminology/structure of "Labs" which is widely used in the
>>> university environment to get academics start the initiative in
>>> their respective universities (also it is easier for them to
>>> convince their higher management on a structure that is known to
>>> them than reinvent a new term for this) .
>>> >
>>> > So it will very helpful for us if you can make use of new
>>> "OSGeo-projects" and metioned star (or similar) rating system for
>>> the incubation as then there is no confusion in the future. Many
>>> thanks for your consideration.
>>> >
>>> > Best wishes,
>>> >
>>> > Suchith
>>> >
>>> > __________________________________________
>>> > From: discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.__org
>>> <mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org><mailto:discuss-bounces at __lists.osgeo.org
>>> <mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org>>
>>> [discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.__org
>>> <mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org><mailto:discuss-bounces at __lists.osgeo.org
>>> <mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org>>] On Behalf Of Jachym
>>> Cepicky [jachym.cepicky at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:jachym.cepicky at gmail.com><__mailto:jachym.cepicky at gmail.__com
>>> <mailto:jachym.cepicky at gmail.com>>]
>>> > Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:27 AM
>>> > To: Vaclav Petras
>>> > Cc: OSGeo Discussions; incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>>> <mailto:incubator at lists.osgeo.org><__mailto:incubator at lists.osgeo.__org
>>> <mailto:incubator at lists.osgeo.org>>
>>> > Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] New incubation procedure
>>> >
>>> > Vašku,
>>> >
>>> > just side note: yes, whith the new "Labs" initiative
>>> "OSGeo-Labs" have to change their name.
>>> >
>>> > My idea would rather be to get rid of current OSGeo- "labs" and
>>> "projects" and start with new "OSGeo-projects" and metioned star
>>> (or similar) rating system.
>>> >
>>> > Than for current OSGeo-Labs "OSGeo-project level 1" would make
>>> it (or similar)
>>> >
>>> > Jachym
>>> >
>>> > po 2. 3. 2015 v 18:33 odesílatel Vaclav Petras
>>> <wenzeslaus at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:wenzeslaus at gmail.com><mailto:w__enzeslaus at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:wenzeslaus at gmail.com>><mailto:we__nzeslaus at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:wenzeslaus at gmail.com><mailto:wenz__eslaus at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:wenzeslaus at gmail.com>>>> napsal:
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 6:44 AM, Jachym Cepicky
>>> <jachym.cepicky at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:jachym.cepicky at gmail.com><__mailto:jachym.cepicky at gmail.__com
>>> <mailto:jachym.cepicky at gmail.com>><mailto:jachym.cepicky at __gmail.com
>>> <mailto:jachym.cepicky at gmail.com><mailto:jachym.__cepicky at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:jachym.cepicky at gmail.com>>>> wrote:
>>> > former "OSGeo Labs" (now it has no name is slowly forgotten in
>>> past, but you can find more at
>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/__OSGeo_Labs
>>> <http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Labs>)
>>> >
>>> > Hi Jachym,
>>> >
>>> > do you think that with the renewal you can replace the name
>>> "OSGeo Labs" by something else? Now we have also ISPRS-ICA-OSGeo
>>> Research and Educational laboratories which might be often
>>> shortened to OSGeo Labs, although I prefer OSGeoRELs for writing.
>>> The mainling list is ica-osgeo-labs. Put perhaps it is not such
>>> an issue since the term "Geo for All" (http://www.geoforall.org/)
>>> is now used more and more (well, the linked website as OSGeo Labs
>>> in the title element).
>>> >
>>> > Thanks for taking this into consideration,
>>> > Vaclav
>>> >
>>> >
>>> _________________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>> <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org><__mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>> <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>__>
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/__mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
>>> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
>>> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately
>>> delete it.
>>>
>>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
>>> message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
>>> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
>>> University of Nottingham.
>>>
>>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
>>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
>>> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
>>> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
>>> permitted by UK legislation.
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>> <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org><__mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>> <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>__>
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/__mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>> <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org><__mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>>> <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>__>
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/__mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
>>> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
>>> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately
>>> delete it.
>>>
>>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
>>> message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
>>> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
>>> University of Nottingham.
>>>
>>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
>>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
>>> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
>>> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
>>> permitted by UK legislation.
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/__mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
--
Daniel Morissette
T: +1 418-696-5056 #201
http://www.mapgears.com/
Provider of Professional MapServer Support since 2000
More information about the Discuss
mailing list