[geomoose-psc] catching up

[Jody]

Aside. We only have one operational requirement currently. The OSGeo board asks that a project officer be made available.   

A few other groups ask for annual involvement - such as the OSGeo journal. A project is also given a slot in the annual general meeting.

The incubation committee is really focused on a minimum. Many of these operational concerns are valid. It is just that incubation is not an appropriate venue - in part as they apply to all projects.  

Summary. We need a volunteer to act as GeoMoose project officer. The board or other committee can contact this officer as needed.   

--  
Jody
Sent with Sparrow (http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/?sig)


On Tuesday, 9 October 2012 at 8:35 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:

>  
> As always I want the documentation to capture what the team currently does .. as such it is project specific.
>  
> Here are some examples from projects I work on:
>  
> GeoTools: "Thou shalt not break the buildDon't break the build"  
> - http://docs.geotools.org/latest/developer/roles/index.html
>  
> GeoServer: "over time some rules and conventions have emerged"
> - http://docs.geoserver.org/stable/en/developer/policies/comitting.html
>  
> And I find your GeoMOOSE Coding Standards to cover the same kind of material:
> - http://www.geomoose.org/developer/standards.html
>  
> As for the scope .. let us ask Cameron what is is thinking of for these guidelines.
> Cameron occasionally expects more process out of projects (with respect to QA etc..).
>  
> --  
> Jody Garnett
>  
>  
> On Tuesday, 9 October 2012 at 5:01 AM, Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul) wrote:
>  
> > Jody,
> >   
> > These listed items sound like they will fall out of completing the list of to-to items, with the exception of Camerons comment.
> >   
> > Sounds like Cameron is asking for two things, "Commiter Responsibilities Guidelines" and "Software Developers Guide" We do have a section for developers in the Geomoose website here: http://www.geomoose.org/developer/index.html, I would imagine that the guidelines would be included there in the end.  I have a question here though, is this something that is in place for all other incubated projects (under these titles).  This almost sounds like something that should be thought of more as a operational requirement by OSGeo instead of controlled at the Project level, something re-evaluated regularly by OSGeo (yearly).  There are actually a few items like this in the check list that could be kept in one spot (on the OSGeo) side instead of replicating in each project.  Even if this item does make sense to keep at the project level, there are other similar checklist items that seem to belong at the OSGeo admin level.  Does this make any sense?
> >   
> > Bobb
> >   
> >   
> >   
> >   
> >   
> > From: geomoose-psc-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:geomoose-psc-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Jody Garnett
> > Sent: Friday, October 05, 2012 3:15 AM
> > To: geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org (mailto:geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org)
> > Subject: [geomoose-psc] catching up  
> >   
> > Evening, although I noticed this email list when filling in the incubation checklist - the archives showed a "Incubation (last items)" thread so I thought I could drop in :D
> >  
> >   
> >  
> > Bobb provided the following:
> >  
> >   
> >  
> > 1) Need Documentation License.
> >  
> > 2) Need Code contribution agreement or statement that we do not require such an agreement (from the Sep 24th, incubation committee meeting minutes).  
> >  
> > 3) Code, documentation and data review work items summarized in one spot.
> >  
> > 4) Author’s list referencing each organization or employer
> >  
> >  
> >   
> >  
> > I also had the following from the incubation meeting (http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/IncCom_Meeting20):
> >  
> > - Frank really wanted to see a code contribution agreement, or a clear notice that one was not being used
> >  
> >   
> >  
> > "FrankW: Normally for projects without a legal contribution agreement it is good to make clear guidelines on provenance responsibilities and to have each committer agree to it. It would certainly be desirable to make that more explicit."
> >  
> >   
> >  
> > And from the email list:
> >  
> > - Cameron: "I'd also like to see "Commiter Responsibilities Guidelines" embedded into a "Software Developers Guide" or similar. I'm afraid the link to meeting minutes doesn't constitute guidelines."
> >  
> >   
> >  
> > --  
> >  
> > Jody Garnett
> >  
> >   
> >  
> >  
> >  
> >  
> >  
> >  
> >  
>  
>  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geomoose-psc/attachments/20121009/efeb3df2/attachment.html>