[Incubator] Info on the Old OSGeo Labs
Daniel Morissette
dmorissette at mapgears.com
Tue Mar 8 07:22:22 PST 2016
Hi Jody,
FWIW I like the idea of a more inclusive place such as the former "OSGeo
Labs", I was even one of the early supporters of the idea.
The only concern that I expressed earlier was to make sure that
terminology and expectations are clear for visitors to the site. I don't
want this to be perceived as a blocker, it was just a constructive
comment to help clarify the wording to make sure that users know what
they are getting from what we call OSGeo projects vs OSGeo technology.
Perhaps a comparison page to address the differences between Projects vs
Technology would help address the possible confusion?
Daniel
On 2016-03-08 10:13 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> We are setting something up different that is not OSGeo labs. We are
> validating - that these projects are open source and participatory.
>
> The result is hopefully a larger OSGeo community.
>
> This direction comes out of a board discussion around being inclusive
> and innovative. It could be the OSGeo Technology idea won't fly ...
>
> Our OSGeo incubation process is set up for stability and safety. While I
> respect this it is holding us back from including different categories
> of projects.
>
> I think the larger issue for the board to wrestle with is that the
> foundation does not provide enough value to projects. While they are
> willing to step up assistance (say incubation sprint or external code
> review) we on the incubation list need to look at our priorities on who
> we can extend this assistance to.
>
> I would still like to see projects like pgRouting try their hand at
> incubation. I think it is a shame incubation. and the foundation, is
> considered hard.
>
> In fact open source is hard, and we are here to help.
>
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 2:35 AM Cameron Shorter
> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> 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.
>
> 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
>> <<mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>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").
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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 <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, Wwww.lisasoft.com <http://www.lisasoft.com>, F +61 2 9009 5099
>
> --
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Incubator mailing list
> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>
--
Daniel Morissette
http://www.mapgears.com/
T: +1 418-696-5056 #201
http://evouala.com/ - Location Intelligence Made Easy
More information about the Incubator
mailing list