[Incubator] Motion: Old "OSGeo Labs" be renamed as "OSGeo Community Projects"
Cameron Shorter
cameron.shorter at gmail.com
Fri Mar 18 04:45:03 PDT 2016
I think we have reached a rough consensus on this thread. I suggest we
vote, hopefully all agree, and move forward.
Motion: The old "OSGeo Labs" should be renamed to "OSGeo Community
Projects".
+1 Cameron
On 17/03/2016 10:06 am, Bruce Bannerman wrote:
> Resend as previous email was blocked by mail server due to message size.
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 8:57 AM, Bruce Bannerman
> <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com
> <mailto:bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Jody,
>
> I like the concept of extending the communications to other
> projects, but perhaps not until we have our thoughts as to what we
> are trying to do sorted out.
>
> We may also want to get the thoughts of those already in
> incubation. I can feel the pain and frustration of projects such
> as Rasdaman that have been working through our process for over
> five years now (though the latest delays are largely my fault).
>
> Perhaps we are looking at this the wrong way and need to look at
> an OSGeo Project Maturity model as Cameron has suggested in the past?
>
> We really are looking at a continuum [1] of open source project
> maturity.
>
> This will allow us to also support Bob's idea of staged
> incubation, rather than one big bang as is currently required.
>
> It will also allow us to influence projects early on with 'the
> OSGeo way' [2].
>
> Bruce
>
> [1] http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/continuum
>
> [2] http://www.osgeo.org/incubator/process/principles.html
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Jody Garnett
> <jody.garnett at gmail.com <mailto:jody.garnett at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Excellent discussion Bruce, thank you. I agree with the
> general feel here, that we are on a scale of "Community"
> (minimal) to "Project" (showcase best practice).
>
> The miss assumption is "starting out" or "immature" - projects
> like pgRouting, GeoWebCache, proj4js are simply "small". We
> would like an opportunity as a foundation to support these
> projects and include them in our organization.
>
> The downside to Hatch and Nurture is that they assume that a
> project will proceed towards graduation. While we may be able
> to capture this as a "staged" incubation process (as per Bob's
> suggestion) it also suffers from this perspective that the
> projects are "not ready yet".
>
> I wonder if we could take this conversation in the other
> direction, contact projects like pgRouting and asking what
> would appeal (rather than guessing at this end what would be
> attractive).
>
> * As a uDig lead I was dissuaded from joining OSGeo by being
> unable to meet the various incubation viability requirements
> (the project was too small).
>
> * In prior conversations with Kevin Smith from GeoWebCache
> there is simply not a business driver to moving from labs to
> incubation - the project is not attracting enough committers
> to qualify. Indeed any available time to work on the project
> is put into the project directly.
>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
> On 16 March 2016 at 00:01, Bruce Bannerman
> <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com
> <mailto:bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Perhaps this is where we need to start.
>
> What is it that we're trying to establish, together with
> the rationale. We can sort a name from there, rather than
> assuming that everyone is familiar with what the old
> 'Labs' were intended for.
>
> In response to your question:
>
> Assumption by me: The 'thing' is intended to support
> projects and their communities that are small, immature,
> or just starting out. These projects are not ready to
> begin graduation, or perhaps do not want to go through the
> process at this stage.
>
> Therefore, we want to find a way to encourage them into
> the OSGeo Community, Principles and way of working.
> Projects may or may not wish to enter graduation as they
> evolve.
>
> Therefore, I saw that we could have a nurturing role for
> these projects, to provide them with basic infrastructure
> for web presence, project governance and code
> repositories. If projects express an interest we could
> introduce them to some of the concepts required of an
> OSGeo Project in graduation. This is heading in the
> direction that Bob Basques suggested for staged graduation.
>
> I see this as potentially a nuturing role, hence the two
> terms:
>
> OSGeo Hatch (as in hatchery for new projects)
>
> OSGeo Nurture.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
>
> If my assumption as to the intent of this 'thing' is
> incorrect, then perhaps we could clarify as a starting point.
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 3:58 PM, Jody Garnett
> <jody.garnett at gmail.com <mailto:jody.garnett at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
>
> That is just it, trying for projects that are not
> emerging - so we do not want to give the impression
> that their technology ish immature (even if we think
> the foundation can offer further help in other areas).
> Bruce cash you preview some reasoning behind your two
> suggestions? I do not want to just be negative ...
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 9:53 PM Bruce Bannerman
> <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com
> <mailto:bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/incubator/attachments/20160318/46793fed/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Incubator
mailing list