[Incubator] longer term approaches to an OSGeo Stack

Bob Basques Bob.Basques at ci.stpaul.mn.us
Thu Oct 29 09:53:38 EDT 2009

Cameron (and others), 

That bundling piece seems like it could become a burden in some instances, probably not a big deal once most of it's all figured out for the first time though, but passing on the knowledge of how to operate that bundling process seems like it will be difficult over the long haul.  If there are no other options there, then I would like to add in an option for configuring on a USB/CD.   I'm thinking there need to be some more structure put to this early on related to how the different types of project can work together.   Concentrate on how to set up a plug and play environment for projects insinuate themselves into.  What about those folks that want to add to the LiveDVD after the fact for example, this seems like a good way to get alignment of methods going over the long run. 

One the time thing, for some reason 3 years for everything seems like a really long time.  One year seems to short, I think I would have shot for a two year total time span on things. 

One other item, who does what from the list, the last piece about the reference book seems like 100% OSGEO, but what about the other tasks, is there a split of some sort, what should it be. 

Overall, I think this is the right way to approach the future, but I would like to see a little more thought put into it before decisions are solidified. 


>>> Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at lisasoft.com> wrote:

I agree with Frank's principles below which have served us well to date,
and I think we should keep them.

I propose now that OSGeo and our software is maturing, we should
recognise the increased quality of our projects through the OSGeo brand.
I see this taking the form of increasing criteria for incubation (or
whatever we may decide to call the OSGeo Quality brand).

The format for increasing quality is something that we can apply
gradually and will need to have caveats as there are differences between
But I suggest a timeframe for quality criteria should include something

within 6 months: 1 page flier describing the project
within 12 months: Packaging of project into LiveDVD  or debian, or osgeo4win
within 18 months: Tutorials on how to use core functionality for the project
within 2 years: Tutorials for all functionality
within 3 years: Training material incorporated into tertiary education
courses / OSGeo reference book

Frank Warmerdam wrote:
> Folks,
> My take is that:
> 1) We have already decided we are not going to pick one "winner" for each
>    part of the stack and exclude others.  This was implicit in MapGuide
>    and MapServer being founding projects of the foundation.  So we are
>    clearly going to be open to multiple projects that fill roughly the
>    same role.
> 2) For our OSGeo marketing message to be effective I think we need to try
>    and restrict ourselves to quality, good-value projects.  Pushing a
> weak
>    project to some extent will devalue the others.  I have mostly chosen
>    to interprete quality in terms of a healthy supporting community
>    and projects that are reasonably mature.
> 3) In the past we have not tried hard to integrate things into a
>    consistent stack, but we have shown some bias towards projects
>    that leverage other OSGeo projects (and to encourage this), and
>    also we have shown more interest in projects that "fill a gap".

Cameron Shorter
Geospatial Solutions Manager
Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050
Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254

Think Globally, Fix Locally
Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source

Incubator mailing list
Incubator at lists.osgeo.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/incubator/attachments/20091029/6a128a36/attachment.html

More information about the Incubator mailing list