[Incubator] Fwd: FW: Suggested tweaks to incubator docs [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

Tue Jan 7 14:44:35 PST 2014

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Bruce Bannerman <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 9:41 AM
Subject: Re: [Incubator] FW: Suggested tweaks to incubator docs
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
To: Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com>

Cameron,

The new wording is fine by me. Thanks.

Bruce

On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 6:59 AM, Cameron Shorter
<cameron.shorter at gmail.com>wrote:

>  Bruce,
> Thanks for the background. In order to address your points, I suggest a
> better wording would be:
>
> "Please explain how your project currently, or intends to adopt an open
> governance policy ensuring decisions are made, documented and adhered to in
> a public manner."
>
> This references back to the graduation checklist, which also adds:
>
> " This typically means a Project Management Committee has been established
> with a process for adding new members. A robust Project Management
> Committee will typically draw upon developers, users and key stakeholders
> from multiple organisations as there will be a greater variety of technical
> visions and the project is more resilient to a sponsor leaving.
> The project uses public communication channels for decision making to
> maintain transparency.
> E.g. archived email list(s), archived IRC channel(s), public issue
> tracker."
>
> I've taken the liberty of updating the Incubation Questions with this
> revised text, but happy for my updates to be worked on.
>
>
> On 07/01/14 15:51, Peter Baumann wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> as rasdaman gets addressed specifically, and as OSGeo Charter Member, let
> me weigh in:
>
> On 01/07/2014 12:21 AM, Bruce Bannerman wrote:
>
>  Cameron,
>
> I’m not wedded to the specific wording that I added.
>
> I do however feel strongly about the concept.
>
> My concern stems from my experiences in mentoring the Rasdaman project
> over several years.
>
> Late in the Incubation process, the project has declared itself to follow
> a ‘Benevolent Dictatorship’ model, with control of the project exercised by
> a small group from essentially one organisation. I currently cannot see how
> community members can be elected on merit into decision making / management
> roles within the community. I did raise this with InCom around five months
> ago [1].
>
> While this issue has still to play itself out within the Rasdaman
> Community, there are lessons to be learnt for future projects that go
> through the Incubation process.
>
>
> indeed, this was delayed for the reason communicated: the roll-out of v9.0
> which is a huge step forward = a huge pile of work. Essentially, the
> international team has established a next-level cloud-parallel analytics
> engine.
> Meantime, however, a governance description exists - see
> http://rasdaman.org/wiki/Governance - which we hadn't announced yet due
> to the recent holidays. So pending the very welcome comments by our mentor,
> Bruce, we do have a statement available now. Thanks again for all your
> precious time invested!
>
>
> I’d like to see the issue of 'openness', particularly in project
> governance brought out into the open and ***addressed*** early in the
> incubation process.
>
>
>
> I do understand that it helps for a project to have active support from at
> least one organisation (commercial, government, NGO, research etc) for long
> term viability. However it is not desirable for a single organisation to
> control the directions of the project for the long term.
>
>
> IMHO for an organization like OSGeo it is extremely important, for its
> public perception, to remain technical and open to different models.
>
>
> I also acknowledge that in the short term that the support of a single
> organisation may be critical for the project to gain sufficient momentum to
> become self-sustaining.
>
>
> Hm, on what empirical facts is this viewpoint based?
> Counter example: Linux. One person in the beginning, community later.
>
>
>  If we can bring this issue out into the open early, then we can work
> through it with the project proposers and decide jointly on how to address
> it.
>
>
> Very much in line with this - your mentoring, Bruce, has brought us
> forward in our project structuring by many miles. However, hardcoding a
> specific doctrine should be avoided.
>
> my 2 cents,
> Peter
>
>
>
> This way we can potentially avoid wasting the project community's and
> mentor’s time.
>
>
>  Bruce
>
> [1] http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/incubator/2013-July/002219.html
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
>
>>  Date: Tuesday, 7 January 2014 7:42 am
>> To: Bruce Bannerman <B.Bannerman at bom.gov.au>, Jody Garnett <
>> jody.garnett at gmail.com>
>> Cc: Incubator <Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Incubator] Suggested tweaks to incubator docs
>> [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
>>
>>   On 06/01/14 10:06, Bruce Bannerman wrote:
>>
>> Cameron,
>>
>>  I made a couple of minor tweaks
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> and added the following question to the draft Incubator Application
>> Questionnaire:
>>
>>  “Please describe any factors that would stop '''any''' suitable member
>> of your community from taking a committer, management or decision making
>> role within your project community.”
>>
>>
>> Hi Bruce, I'm not comfortable with the above sentence as it stands. In
>> particular, rather than asking for a specific FACT which can be backed by a
>> metric, it is asking for an OPINION requesting arguments against the
>> project. (A supporter of a project is probably not the likely person to
>> provide that OPINION.)
>>
>> I think it would help if you expanded on the reason(s) you think this
>> question should be added to incubator docs.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cameron Shorter,
>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
>> LISAsoft
>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>>
>> P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Incubator mailing listIncubator at lists.osgeo.orghttp://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>
>
> --
> Dr. Peter Baumann
>  - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
>    www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann
>    mail: p.baumann at jacobs-university.de
>    tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178
>  - Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793)
>    www.rasdaman.com, mail: baumann at rasdaman.com
>    tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882
> "Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis ventis dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli destinata, nec preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD 1083)
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Incubator mailing listIncubator at lists.osgeo.orghttp://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>
>
>
> --
> Cameron Shorter,
> Software and Data Solutions Manager
> LISAsoft
> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>
> P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/incubator/attachments/20140108/a9511485/attachment.html>