[Incubator] Rasdaman Incubation way forward [was: [rasdaman-users] rasdaman installation]

[Bruce Bannerman]

Hi Peter,

I appreciate that there is often a lot of higher priority work that leaves
less time for our volunteer efforts.

We'll just have to chip away as we can.

I noted the comment below from an earlier email from you to the Rasdaman
Users list [5].

*"When it comes to management we still have the additional burden of OSGeo
incubation where at least one incubation voter tends to request significant
additional work which seems to transcend the incubation work item list (and
possibly the workload of other incubating projects)."*

I was going to let this public comment pass, but after some reflection
decided that this  response is warranted.

I don't believe that the Rasdaman Project is being singled out and
unrealistic demands being made. I don't really see anything different in
the request for additional information at [3] from my original advice, e.g.
at [1].

I also don't believe that the Incubation process should be viewed as a
burden, but as an opportunity to implement appropriate governance and
processes that will help a project to thrive as a sustainable open source
community, particularly should a key project sponsor decide to remove their
sponsorship.

I can see very good potential for Rasdaman as an open source project. That
is why I have invested considerable effort over the last five years as
project mentor.

I believe that Rasdaman is ready for graduation from incubation. We just
need to be able to convince the other members of the Incubation Committee
as well.

I don't believe that this should be very hard. We had a lot of positive
feedback from our last attempt at graduation. See the discussion at [2].


So where to from here:

I find my summary from May last year at [1] still relevant.

*"- provide a short succinct statement that explains the details of how
Rasdaman meets each requirement.

Much of what we will need to reference has already been documented on the
Rasdaman wiki. We do not need to reproduce the wiki content in the
document. Just make the case for each criterion and refer readers to the
appropriate URL for more information."*

Cameron's email from [3] provides some specific items to address.

My email at [4] outlines what I believe as the way forward.

I'm happy to look at an alternate approach that you may wish to suggest.

I appreciate that this may be frustrating and that addressing items
may take a little time, given competing priorities.

Bruce

[1] http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/incubator/2014-May/002423.html

[2] http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/incubator/2014-October/thread.html

[3] http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/incubator/2014-October/002522.html

[4] http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/incubator/2014-October/002523.html

[5] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rasdaman-users/7oEac_CHxfo

________________________________________

> From: rasdaman-users at googlegroups.com [rasdaman-users at googlegroups.com]
> On Behalf Of Peter Baumann [baumann at rasdaman.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, 31 March 2015 6:02 PM
> To: rasdaman-users at googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: [rasdaman-users] rasdaman installation
>
> <snip>

>
> When it comes to management we still have the additional burden of OSGeo
> incubation where at least one incubation voter tends to request significant
> additional work which seems to transcend the incubation work item list (and
> possibly the workload of other incubating projects).
>
> </snip>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/incubator/attachments/20150402/b29808f2/attachment.html>