[Incubator] MetaCRS

[Daniel Morissette]

Hi Cameron,

You seem to be interchanging the names proj4 and proj4j in your 
messages. Can you please indicate if you are refering to proj4 (the C 
lib), proj4j (Java port of proj4), or to suggesting a combination of 
both as an OSGeo project? In the latter case should we consider also 
proj4js in the pack?

Daniel

On 13-09-13 11:08 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> Frank,
> I'm ok with a project being in incubation if the project is making
> steady progress toward an incubation goal. From what I can gather, the
> MetaCRS project has stalled, and as such we should think about options,
> such as incubating the sub-projects of MetaCRS individually.
>
> I think that proj4j is worthy of an OSGeo stamp of approval. I expect
> that proj4j would pass all OSGeo incubation criteria, except the broad
> base of contributors?
>
> The broad base of contributors criteria is a measure of the future
> viability of the project. In the proj4 case, I believe that a strong
> case can be presented that the project would continue on, even if Frank
> were to stop maintaining it tomorrow.
> Reasons:
> 1. There are many technically competent proj4j uses with a vested
> interest in proj4j being maintained. These users would almost certainly
> step up to continue maintaining proj4j if required.
> 2. proj4j is a very mature code base, which I suspect doesn't require
> much maintenance any more?
>
> As such, I'd like to see a case put forward for proj4 to be incubated,
> as I think it would be voted through by our committee.
>
>
> On 14/09/13 10:01, Frank Warmerdam wrote:
>>
>> Cameron,
>>
>> The reason MetaCRS was done as a sort of meta project was that it was
>> perceived that each would be too small on it's own to be considered a
>> viable community. If were to try and incubate them separately, how
>> would we address that concern.  For instance, at least at times PROJ.4
>> has been essentially a one man project despite having a fairly broad
>> user base.
>>
>> I had vague aspirations that a sort of community would gel amount the
>> components of the MetaCRS project.  There has been a little synergy
>> out of this, but quite far short of what I might have hoped for in
>> terms of gelling.
>>
>> I must say, I'm not sure of the way forward.
>>
>> I, personally, am ok with this sitting in incubation of for a while
>> longer but I realize that some other folks on the committee would like
>> to see time horizons shorter than a decade for the incubation process. :-)
>>
>> We could actually reasonably easily (IMHO) push the copyright review
>> phase ahead.  But I'm not sure how worthwhile that is without a
>> meaningfully gelled shared community.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Frank
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Cameron Shorter
>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Daniel, Frank,
>>     I suspect that the grouping of the MetaCRS projects together would
>>     be making it hard to complete incubation, because you would be
>>     needing to check back on all projects to confirm completion of
>>     each incubation step?
>>
>>     Maybe a way forward would be to push each project through
>>     incubation separately? I suspect that proj4j should be able to fly
>>     through the criteria very quickly by itself?
>>
>>     On 13/09/13 23:13, Daniel Morissette wrote:
>>
>>         Hi Jody, all,
>>
>>         I am currently the mentor for the MetaCRS project, which is a
>>         kind of a special case because it is an aggregate of multiple
>>         CRS-related projects, given that each of them is not big
>>         enough on its own, but that the services they provide are
>>         critical to all OSGeo software, and we thought that
>>         cross-collaboration between those projects can be a great
>>         OSGeo asset and a way to raise their respective bus numbers.
>>
>>         I still believe that MetaCRS should try to get through
>>         incubation, but I can't find the time to work with them in a
>>         proactive way towards that (and they have not made that a
>>         priority either).
>>
>>         All this to say that if another experienced mentor is
>>         interested, then it may be a good idea that I leave this
>>         project to a new mentor to work with the MetaCRS projects to
>>         figure how to handle their special situation and get them
>>         through incubation.
>>
>>         The lead of the MetaCRS project is Frank Warmerdam BTW.
>>
>>         Any volunteer?
>>
>>         Daniel
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
>> I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam,
>> warmerdam at pobox.com <mailto:warmerdam at pobox.com>
>> light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
>> <http://pobox.com/%7Ewarmerdam>
>> and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Software Developer
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Incubator mailing list
> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>


-- 
Daniel Morissette
http://www.mapgears.com/
Provider of Professional MapServer Support since 2000