[Incubator] Info on the Old OSGeo Labs
Stephen Woodbridge
woodbri at swoodbridge.com
Wed Mar 9 07:07:42 PST 2016
+1 on this idea. It also rewards following the process with incremental
achievements which can provide motivation for tackling the next step(s).
Great idea Bob.
-Steve W
On 3/9/2016 8:34 AM, Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul) wrote:
> All,
>
> I often thought that incubation should be thought of in this way. By
> separating out the requirements into logical steps instead of one big
> pass or fail type of measure.
>
> I’ve suggested in the past that the incubation process could be
> separated up into nice neat smaller steps, which would lower the barrier
> to getting started while still allowing for the idea of come one come
> all approach.
>
> Rather than just two steps, maybe more certification steps should be
> thought about.
>
> bobb
>
>
>> On Mar 8, 2016, at 5:09 PM, Massimiliano Cannata
>> <massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch <mailto:massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Just 2 cents
>> But maybe the point is not to have project not verified but with lower
>> level of requirements. Could a project graduate for being an osgeo
>> technology still making a code provenance even if is a one man code?
>>
>> Maxi
>>
>> Il 08/Mar/2016 21:30, "Jody Garnett" <jody.garnett at gmail.com
>> <mailto:jody.garnett at gmail.com>> ha scritto:
>>
>> Thanks for the support/discussion Daniel/Cameron - I am open to a
>> word other than "OSGeo Technology".
>>
>> Many of the other words proposed missed the point of the
>> exercise... it is more useful to think of a project like pgRouting
>> <http://pgrouting.org/> or PROJ <https://trac.osgeo.org/proj/>
>> than to think of 100 lines of javascript.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 8 March 2016 at 12:25, Cameron Shorter
>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> 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>
>> <mailto: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
>> <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>>cameron.shorter at gmail.com
>> <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
>> <mailto: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>>
>>
>> <mailto: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>>
>> <mailto: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>
>> <mailto: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>
>> <mailto: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>
>> <tel:%2B61%202%209009%205000>, W
>> www.lisasoft.com <http://www.lisasoft.com/>
>> <http://www.lisasoft.com
>> <http://www.lisasoft.com/>>, F +61 2 9009 5099
>> <tel:%2B61%202%209009%205099>
>> <tel:%2B61%202%209009%205099>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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>,
>> Wwww.lisasoft.com <http://wwww.lisasoft.com/>
>> <http://www.lisasoft.com <http://www.lisasoft.com/>>,
>> F +61 2 9009 5099 <tel:%2B61%202%209009%205099>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Incubator mailing list
>> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Incubator mailing list
> 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
More information about the Incubator
mailing list