Fwd: [Incubator] Project Incubation Mentor

Frank Warmerdam warmerdam at pobox.com
Thu Apr 6 00:25:39 EDT 2006


Sean Gillies wrote:
>> My perception is that the committee wants to fast track the initial 
>> projects. That's what I mean by mainstream. IMO, the process should be 
>> slower, more conservative, and have a real effect on the projects.

Sean,

It is certainly true that I'm hoping for relatively rapid progress
through incubation and have been pushing.  But pushing back is OK
if there are effects we are looking for in incubation and we aren't
achieving them in the short term.

>> Conservative to me means that only projects with a bright and shiny 
>> future should be released from the incubator.

I think we can all agree that we don't want moribund projects in the
foundation.  It reflects poorly on the foundation, and it distracts
and confuses users who assume that foundation software must be good
and well supported.

What is less clear to me is how bright and shiny a project needs to
be to be part of the foundation.  Obviously, we would like to attract
the best projects because they offer the foundation the most reflected
glory, and because the foundation is likely to accomplish the most with
them.

But I don't personally see a problem with having a foundation project
that works well, is mature and well supported but perhaps lacks the
growth and excitement of some other projects.  Even a project in
gentile and benign decline wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing though
I can't imagine being to excited about inviting such a project in
unless it filled a particularly important role.

 >> To be specific, I think
>> MapServer's best days are behind it. I'm not talking code, here. I'm 
>> talking about developers and business. Much of MapServer's development 
>> is mercenary. We've usually seen this as a sign of vigor: people are
>> making money as MapServer developers. On the other hand, mercenary 
>> developers can always be employed away to other projects. I expect to 
>> see Autodesk undermine MapServer like this. It's not evil, it's just 
>> business. Additionally, the MapServer Enterprise/Cheetah fiasco showed 
>> me how ready some businesses are to swap MapServer out for the next 
>> big thing. IMO, MapServer should demonstrate that its mojo is healthy 
>> and increasing before it's out of the incubator.

Hmm, I'm not sure I agree with all the above, though it is an interesting
opinion.

>> GDAL, on the other hand, clearly has a bright future. What I'd like to 
>> see there is a real indicator that the project is achieving its goal 
>> of transition from benevolent tyranny to community and meritocracy. 

I think it would be helpful for us to write up what it is we expect
of projects in this regard.  I have written odds and ends into some
of the incubator documents about having a PSC that is in control, and
is functioning well, but we haven't been to clear in our goals for
responsible governance.

I feel that at a minimum there needs to be a PSC with at least 3
members from different organizations.  I would like to know that these
PSCs are open to outside input, and would be willing to add new
qualified members as appropriate.  What I fear are closed cliques.
I'm just not sure how to test this without trying to join. :-)

And I want to know that the PSC is really in control.  That is
that things aren't just run by a dictator with the PSC as a facade
that is disregarded at will.  Actually, I'd also like to see that
the PSC is control of things in other regards as well!  That random
committers aren't just doing all sorts of crazy stuff without regard
to contribution guidelines and due process.

I'm not so sure what to make of "meritocracy".

I'd be interested in hearing what you (and others!) think is
desirable and ought to be required in terms of community.  In my
efforts so far I have emphasized that that there ought to be a
support forum / mailing list where questions are reasonably
likely to be answered.  To me this is one of the most important
manifestations of community.  That users speak to users about
how to solve problems.

>> What would the indicator be? I don't know for sure. Independent 
>> mercenary developers or consultants might be a good sign. We always 
>> thought they were for MapServer. (Note that it is very possible that I 
>> am just unaware of existing independent GDAL developers and 
>> consultants.) I think the same measure could be usefully applied to 
>> single-shop projects like MapGuide OS.

Hmm, I think you have a point about independent consultants in the case
of GDAL.  There are other developers doing work as part of organizations
(IDRISI, PCRaster, ITC, USGS, LANL, etc) and there are "independent"
developers but the so called independent developers (such as Andrey
Kiselev, Denis Nadeau, or Howard Butler) are often subcontracted by
me which means they aren't exactly independent of me.  I certainly
think it would be a sign of project health to have independent
developer/consultants finding their own contracts for work that feeds
back as improvements to GDAL.

>> I don't intend that going slow be punitive, but that it give adequate 
>> time for projects to make progress on the transformations that they've 
>> begun.

I can agree that it takes some time to check that transitions to
a working PSC can take time.  I'm not sure what other aspects of
incubation require time to settle out.  I think the code copyright
review is done when done.  Infrastructure transitions are done when
they are done.

So, for a project like MapServer that already had a healthy "OSGeo
style PSC" I think that it could be ready for approval once it
passes the (IPish) hurdles.  Of course, that is assuming we agree
that it's community and vitality is "good enough", but from my
point of view this is not in doubt.

For projects like GDAL, OSSIM, GRASS, MapBender or MapGuide, I think
we have  something to prove with regard to open and mature governance
and this may take some time.  I think MapBuilder, and GeoTools are
pretty mature in this regard, though I don't know them well enough
to be sure.

But ultimately we, and the board on our advice, has to decide what
we think is important in foundation projects, and develop mechanisms
to test for it, and/or inculcate it.

Best regards,

-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam at pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGF, http://osgeo.org





More information about the Incubator mailing list