[Incubator] Info on the Old OSGeo Labs
Cameron Shorter
cameron.shorter at gmail.com
Tue Mar 8 12:25:41 PST 2016
Jody,
As per Daniel's comment.
+1 to OSGeo being more inclusive by providing a light weight process for
joining (in line with your suggestions)
-1 for the words "OSGeo Technology". Are you open to changing to another
word than "Technology"?
On 9/03/2016 2:22 am, Daniel Morissette wrote:
> 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
>>
>
>
--
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