[Incubator] Motion: GEOS to Graduate Incubation

[Cameron Shorter]

Frank,
Thankyou for your responses and hard work in mentoring.

I am currently +0 for graduation of Geos.

I will be +1 once:
* An OSGeo Project Officer has been identified. Can we also ask this 
project officer if they will act as a contact point for the OSGeo-Live 
project too?
* A commitment has been made to create an OSGeo-Live Project Overview in 
time for the next OSGeo-Live release. (Frank, I think you have already 
made that commitment)



On 21/03/2012 9:30 AM, Frank Warmerdam wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 2:40 PM, Cameron Shorter
> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> Frank,
>> Before we pass Geos through incubation, could you please point us at answers
>> to the Incubation checklist:
> Good point!
>
>> Current version here:
>> http://www.osgeo.org/incubator/process/project_graduation_checklist.html
>>
>> Although I think it would be better to make use of the new 2.0 version of
>> the checklist which I think Jody is about to get approved.
>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Draft_Project_Graduation_Checklist_Draft
> Let me try to address the draft checklist.
>
> Open:
>
> The code is under an open source license (LGPL).
> Communication is done via the open mailing list and Trac.
> Decision making is open, on the list, though my concern is that the
> project hasn't really had contentious decisions to make so I'm not
> fully confident in the maturity of the project in making tough decisions.
> But I am not concerned about it being too closed.
>
> Active and healthy community:
>
> The developers and users are cooperative and open.
>
> I am concerned about the size of the developer community, though there
> are multiple contributors from different organizations so I think this is ok.
>
>
> Copyright and License:
>
> 1. Again, the code is under an open source license.
> 2. I believe the API documentation is under LGPL by virtue of being
> derived from the source files.  There is relatively little other
> documentation.
> 3. The code is properly vetted as part of the provenence review.
> 4. I do not believe the project keeps a list of copyright holders
> identified in the provenance review, and now that I come on this item
> in the checklist I question it's appropriateness.  We do not normally
> expect projects to keep a list of copyright holders.
> 5. The commiters have agreed to the license policy.  I'm not sure
> about this agreement being archived.  I see this is archived for Chuck
> Thibert, but seemingly not for Steven Wong.
>
> Processes:
>
> 1. The code is under svn.
> 2. The project uses Trac.
> 3. The project has RFCs covering the PSC and committer guidelines.  A
> bit light I must admit.
>
> Release Procedure:
>
> 1. The project does not have a codified release procedure.  It does
> have established practice which involves beta's and RCs for review,
> and a vote before the release is finalized.
> 2.  The project has a significant regression test ("make check").
> 3. The processes are not documented though they are part of the
> project culture.
>
> Board:
>
> A person has not yet been identified to be the project officer.  I
> would suggest the person be Sandro Santilli, and I will discuss this
> with the project now.
>
> Marketing:
>
> The project lacks a "quickstart" page or an "application overview" or
> a one page flier.  I'm not sure quickstart is applicable since the
> project does not have any user facing tools, but at least an overview
> is desirable.
>
> The project is included in most binary distributions including OSGeo
> Live, UbuntuGIS, and OSGeo4W.
>
> Projects:
>
> The GEOS project has good links to GDAL/OGR, PostGIS, Ingres, and
> MapServer projects primarily in the form of common developers.
>
> SAC:
>
> The project is hosted at OSGeo, in the geos.osgeo.org domain and makes
> good use of SAC support.
>
>
> I would note I had imagined the check list being something that the
> mentor would review before recommending a project for graduation, and
> that incubation committee members would take into account when voting.
>   I was not expecting that a detailed report against the items would be
> expected from the mentor or project.
>
>> Of note (from the new checklist), I think that Geos should be addressing the
>> Marketing criteria from the new checklist, which would include creating a
>> Project Overview for Geos:
>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Draft_Project_Graduation_Checklist_Draft#Marketing
> Agreed, this is a deficiency worth rectifying.
>
> Best regards,


-- 
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
http://www.lisasoft.com