[Incubator] Meeting Reminder

[Frank Warmerdam]

Jody Garnett wrote:
> Hi everyone, I am doing a presentation to a combined crowd of Java and 
> GIS users on Monday night (for details
> please see the africa at osgeo.org list) and will be unable to attend.

Jody,

Good luck!

> 1. Review Project Status Template
> 
> Seems straightforward - not quite sure what "Have project documents been 
> updated to reflect membership in the foundation, and the relationship of 
> the project to the foundation?" means.

The idea is that project pages ought to be showing in their "about"
pages or other appropriate locations that they are now a member of
OSGeo.

> 2. Incubation Mentor Guidelines
> 
> 3. Project Infrastructure Migration
> 
> Can the integration table for collabnet be completed?

I didn't really get what you wanted in this integration table, so I
can't hack it.

> 4. Incubation status documents
> 
> You will find a status page now, and some of the notes made as we wind 
> our way through the geotools process. Many of the issues I am 
> considering do not seem to be on the table (ie documentation review, 
> dependency on other libs etc...).

Ideally I would like to see you bring these issues forward for discussion
and possible inclusion.

>> The final item is a fairly opened ended discussion of what the 
>> "incubation
>> transformation" should mean, and whether there are additional 
>> requirements
> I think we should do as we always planned, use these initial projects as 
> a guide
> to what kinds of transformations should be expected as a project goes 
> though
> incubation. During discussion & email several interesting expectations 
> were raised
> and I think talking to the projects afterwards will lead to a good set 
> of ideas.

Note, the way I understood the initial intention, we were going to essentially
use the lowest common denominator of the first 8 projects to establish minimum
entrance criteria for new projects.  That it, it was expressed as "we
shouldn't be imposing any criteria the initial eight projects can't meet".

Now that was obviously a "do nothing" sort of plan that implied our incubation
should be instantanious and then our job would be to develop documents
describing this low bar.

However, I'm not really satisfied with that, and clearly there was also
an expectation from others that we should be setting at least moderate
standards as long as it didn't make incubation unachievable for the
initial projects (assuming they are willing to put in some elbow
grease).

You write "I think we should do as we always planned, use these initial
projects as a guide to what kinds of transformations should be expected
as a project goes though incubation."  I'm afraid I don't understand what
you mean.  Are we looking at the eight projects for best practices that
we need to apply to the rest of our projects?  Are we still just looking
for the lowest common denominator?  When we talk about "transformations"
I think some activity is implied, but without setting some standards why
do we think any activity will take place?

If we are looking for best practices to apply, what are they?

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