[Incubator] Info on the Old OSGeo Labs
Cameron Shorter
cameron.shorter at gmail.com
Tue Mar 8 02:45:43 PST 2016
Yes, "OSGeo aspiring projects" works.
On 8/03/2016 9:43 pm, Even Rouault wrote:
> Le mardi 08 mars 2016 11:35:18, Cameron Shorter a écrit :
>> Hey Jody,
>> I'm actually agreeing with all you are suggesting doing with the
>> rebranded "OSGeo Labs", except the name "OSGeo Technology". This name
>> misrepresents the "Self Serve", non-validated concept of "OSGeo Labs".
>> The name implies "built out of OSGeo Projects". This is a dis-service
>> to people who come to our site for the first time, a dis-service to
>> "OSGeo Projects" who now become associated with immature projects.
>>
>> Pick a more accurate name than "OSGeo Technology" and I'd back the rest
>> of what you are suggesting.
> OSGeo aspiring projects ?
>
>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>
>> On 7/03/2016 9:55 am, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>> This is going to be a tough one Cameron ... our brand currently has a
>>> reputation for turning projects away ... not quality.
>>>
>>> The long story short is how to respond to the direction to be
>>> inclusive. We have two strong characters on this mailing list with an
>>> axe to grind making it difficult for projects to be part of OSGeo. I
>>> am very keen on projects *being* open source, and you are very keen on
>>> making projects safe for users to adopt (project viability, quality,
>>> open standards).
>>>
>>> I am proposing repurposing "OSGeo Labs" (which did not promise
>>> anything as a brand and got adopted by GeoForAll) as "OSGeo
>>> Technology" to focus on the open source angle; in order to preserve
>>> "OSGeo Projects" (and incubation) to focus on the second.
>>>
>>> We have a tension here between being inclusive (read easy) and
>>> transparent (which takes effort).
>>>
>>> How would you like to add "transparency" to this mix? We could provide
>>> a table with website, download, documentation, test results - not sure
>>> if that would help with transparency?
>>>
>>> I know we keep coming back to a rating system on this mailing list - I
>>> recognize your work in this area for OSGeo Live with the introduction
>>> of black duck metrics. I imagine you would also be happy to phrase
>>> things as positive "badges" (for projects that have documentation, or
>>> quality assurance, or standards testing). For quality, documentation
>>> and so forth I think we are stuck leading by example (and perhaps
>>> working with the OGC on standards compliance).
>>>
>>> On 3 March 2016 at 23:57, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com
>>>
>>> <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> Hi Jody,
>>> I agree with your suggestion that "Old OSGeo Labs" need not have
>>> an aim of entering OSGeo incubation.
>>> However, I object to any project becoming associated with OSGeo
>>> without it being obvious about the level of quality control the
>>> project has gone through.
>>>
>>> As suggested below, I could knock together 100 lines of
>>> uncommented, non-working code, give it an open source license, and
>>> then add a "OSGeo Technology" logo to the home page. And most
>>> average punters wouldn't know the difference between term "OSGeo
>>> Project" and "OSGeo Technology". This would result in diminishing
>>> the current association between OSGeo applications and quality,
>>> which would be a bad thing.
>>>
>>> I feel "OSGeo Labs", "OSGeo Community Builder Projects", or
>>> shortened to "OSGeo Builder Projects" are less likely to be
>>> confused with "OSGeo Incubated" projects.
>>>
>>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>>
>>> On 4/03/2016 2:13 am, Stephen Woodbridge wrote:
>>> +1, I think these changes make a lot of sense and as part of
>>> an OSGeo Technology project this feels very inclusive.
>>>
>>> -Steve W
>>>
>>> On 3/3/2016 9:46 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>> I would like to change the tone of the page a bit, since
>>> it "assumes"
>>> incubation ..
>>>
>>> /OSGeo Labs is an umbrella for open source geospatial
>>>
>>> software
>>>
>>> projects that would like to become OSGeo projects in
>>>
>>> the future, but
>>>
>>> that aren't ready for incubation quite yet. It is
>>>
>>> appropriate to
>>>
>>> submit your new or experimental project as an OSGeo
>>>
>>> labs project./
>>>
>>> /
>>> /
>>> /The volunteers that work as part of OSGeo Labs have
>>>
>>> the goal of
>>>
>>> helping OSGeo Labs Projects qualify for incubation. To
>>>
>>> reach this
>>>
>>> goal, OSGeo Labs volunteers help OSGeo Labs Projects
>>>
>>> with the
>>>
>>> following tasks:
>>> /
>>>
>>> Would become:
>>> /Welcome to OSGeo Technology. The projects listed here
>>>
>>> are part of
>>>
>>> the Open Source Geospatial Foundation and range from new
>>> experimental projects to established pillars of our
>>>
>>> open source
>>>
>>> ecosystem./
>>> /
>>> /
>>> /All projects here meet our goals as an organization -
>>>
>>> they are open
>>>
>>> source (no really we checked) and are inclusive and
>>>
>>> welcoming to new
>>>
>>> contributors./
>>> /
>>> /
>>>
>>> /Projects that go on to establish excellence in
>>>
>>> community building,
>>>
>>> documentation, and governance can enter our
>>>
>>> "incubation" program. /
>>>
>>>
>>> I would also lose the "status" conditions
>>> seed/seedling/sapling/adult
>>> and keep OSGeo Technology focused on the basics (open source
>>> & inclusive). The status becomes having the "OSGeo
>>> Technology" badge nice
>>> and simple.
>>>
>>> Thinking this through a bit more we have one clear reason
>>> for projects
>>> to go through with incubation - being recognized by the
>>> board and having
>>> an OSGeo Officer listed directly for the project, while
>>> OSGeo Technology
>>> projects "share" an officer (as part of "incubation
>>> committee").
>>>
>>> On 11 February 2016 at 11:04, Landon Blake
>>> <sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com>
>>> <mailto:sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com
>>>
>>> <mailto:sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>>> There is some good information on what we were trying
>>>
>>> to achieve
>>>
>>> with the old OSGeo Labs on the wiki:
>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Labs
>>>
>>> I think most of that information on the wiki still
>>>
>>> applies. This
>>>
>>> includes the purpose of labs, how projects get started
>>>
>>> in labs, what
>>>
>>> labs is trying to accomplish, and the criteria to
>>>
>>> determine if your
>>>
>>> project is a good fit for labs.
>>>
>>> Does anyone have major heartburn with what is laid out
>>>
>>> on that wiki
>>>
>>> page? (I'll rename the wiki page as soon as we get a
>>>
>>> new name for labs.)
>>>
>>> Landon
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>> Incubator mailing list
>>>
>>> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>
>>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>>> <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>>
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Incubator mailing list
>>> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>>>
>>> ---
>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
>>> software.
>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Incubator mailing list
>>> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>>>
>>> P +61 2 9009 5000 <tel:%2B61%202%209009%205000>, W
>>> www.lisasoft.com <http://www.lisasoft.com>, F +61 2 9009 5099
>>> <tel:%2B61%202%209009%205099>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Incubator mailing list
>>> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Incubator at lists.osgeo.org>
>>> http://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
More information about the Incubator
mailing list