[Incubator] Motion: Rasdaman ready to graduate from OSGeo Incubation
jody.garnett at gmail.com
Tue May 3 21:31:35 PDT 2016
We have an impasse as this is one of those discussions (like licensing)
where both parties can be correct. In this case the conflict is not with
our ideals of open source but with our ideals inclusive governance.
Well I am prepared to ask the board - our president has given us a strong
mandate assist projects joining the foundation. It will however be a pretty
soul searching discussion for who we are as a foundation. This is not a
standard the incubation committee can relax on our own.
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 5:54 PM Landon Blake <sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com>
> What is the verdict on the "benevolent dictator" issue? I'm thinking this
> probably won't fly with our board, or our larger community.
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 10:56 PM, Peter Baumann <
> p.baumann at jacobs-university.de> wrote:
>> I understand where you are coming from, and your characterization is
>> definitely correct. While our process is and always has been absolutely
>> open to discussion so as to obtain the scientifically and technically best
>> solution this "benevolent dictatorship" has brought rasdaman to where it
>> stands now - it is designed by innovation, not by committee. Just to get me
>> right, our model is certainly not the right one for every endeavour. Here
>> it is the most appropriate, and hence we will keep it.
>> As you observe, this model is not contradicting OS as such, and many
>> projects run it. So ultimately it lies in the hand of OSGeo to decide
>> whether they accept the existing plurality of approaches (in this case
>> manifest with rasdaman).
>> On 04/30/2016 10:47 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>> Bruce, Peter,
>> I've read through the incubation process documentation, and can only see
>> one thing which I think breaks our OSGeo principles.
>> The Governance model includes a statement:
>> "In all issues, the PSC strives to achieve unanimous consent based on a
>> free, independent exchange of facts and opinions. Should such consent
>> exceptionally not be reached then Peter Baumann has a casting vote."
>> This is describing a "benevolent dictator" model, which has proved to be
>> an effective model for many open source projects. See Eric Raymond's
>> "Homesteading the Noosphere":
>> However, it is not in line with existing OSGeo Incubated projects, which
>> have documented a "vote by PSC" as the defining governance process. In
>> practice, the PSC community debate alternatives, and if needed,
>> respectfully revert to reasoned advice provided by the "benevolent
>> Peter, are you open to changing the governance model to a "vote by PSC"?
>> I'd be comfortable with a "vote by PSC, with PSC chair being given 1.5
>> votes to break any deadlocks. I'd also be ok with PSC chair defaulting to
>> Peter (as founder), until such time as Peter resigns from the role."
>> Warm regards, Cameron
>> On 19/10/2014 8:30 am, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>> Hi Peter and Bruce,
>> I've reviewed the incubation documentation provided, and provided a few
>> spot reviews of the referenced documentation.
>> Overall, I think the documentation is in good shape, but missing
>> explanations, particularly around licenses and testing.
>> Below are a few things that I'd like to see looked into before final sign
>> Looking at: http://rasdaman.org/wiki/OSGeoIncubationChecklist which
>> provides the summary about how the project is ready to complete graduation.
>> * For each statement that you are addressing, please add a brief sentence
>> explaining HOW you are addressing the statement, possibly also with an
>> For instance, currently for: "Open communication channels", you have "see
>> In reviewing, I can see that a mailing list has been set up. In looking
>> at the list, I see users are asked questions on the user list and there are
>> answers. I can see that auto-patch messages are being pumped into the
>> developers list. In my quick scan, I can't see discussions between
>> developers about a new feature, and discussions about a design idea. So I'd
>> suggest describing how communication is happening. Maybe:
>> "See MailingLists <URL>. User questions are typically addressed on the
>> user email list. Development is currently mostly happening at Jacobs
>> University, and discussions about development typically happen in person,
>> and the results of such conversations are summarised onto the developer
>> email list (or ...)."
>> * For "Open Source License": I'd be hoping to see a statement about the
>> dual license, including a comment about the enterprise license. I'm ok with
>> the dual license concept which I think fits with OSGeo principles.
>> Further, from the material and links provided, it seems plausible that the
>> GPL license terms are broken by LGPL and enterprise licensed products being
>> I feel there needs to be an explanation of the enterprise license, and
>> then about how LGPL products and enterprise products don't need to be GPL
>> (because they don't link in any GPL libraries?).
>> * "*Long term viability*":
>> Sentence needed here discussing roughly how many contributors you have,
>> (as well as existing reference to patchmanager).
>> * *Project documentation is available under an open license, as
>> documented here: Legal*:
>> The referenced "Legal" link doesn't talk about Documentation. Please
>> reference correct documentation license link.
>> * *http://rasdaman.org/wiki/Legal <http://rasdaman.org/wiki/Legal>* :
>> Remove references to "... blah-blah ..."
>> * " *Which includes execution of the testing process before releasing a
>> stable release: http://18.104.22.168:35000/ <http://22.214.171.124:35000/>"*
>> Link requires user log in. A sentence explaining testing will help here.
>> * "*All patches submitted to the repository undergo review before being
>> applied to the code base:
>> <http://www.rasdaman.org/patchmanager>*" :
>> This doesn't confirm that patches are reviewed (by a person), only that
>> you use patchmanager.
>> * "*Systemtests are to be run by developers before submitting patches:
>> <http://www.rasdaman.org/wiki/CodeGuide>*" :
>> This code guide is good, but on my first pass, I can't see any reference
>> to testing processes. How do you verify that all code is tested? Ideally
>> reference continual integration or similar.
>> * Link to *http://rasdaman.org/browser/systemtest
>> <http://rasdaman.org/browser/systemtest>* is broken. I'm looking for
>> evidence of testing processes, including unit testing, continuous
>> integration, and a system testing plan which is executed.
>> On 29/04/2016 9:13 am, Bruce Bannerman wrote:
>> Hello Colleagues,
>> Can I please get some indication that this motion has been read, rather
>> than stunned silence?
>> It has now been over a week since I initiated this vote. I have not seen
>> a single reply.
>> How long can a motion stay open before the vote is counted? I vaguely
>> recall that it was two weeks.
>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Bruce Bannerman <
>> <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com>bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Take 2
>>> Dear Incubation Committee,
>>> After a long six years of effort, I'd like to recommend that Rasdaman is
>>> ready for graduation from the OSGeo Incubation process.
>>> You will find the Incubation Checklist at:
>>> I believe that the Rasdaman community have met our requirements to
>>> graduate from incubation.
>>> I have found the community to be robust and very active attracting
>>> contributors from many corners of the globe.
>>> The project is attracting quite a bit of interest, together with
>>> European Union funding for additional development that appears to be going
>>> into the open source version of the product.
>>> I have also noted that Rasdaman Gmbh is also moving some of their
>>> previously proprietary capability into the open source version.
>>> Peter Bauman, the man behind Rasdaman is also making very significant
>>> and noteworthy contributions to the world of open spatial standards through
>>> his work within OGC and W3C Spatial Data on the Web Working Group. Rasdaman
>>> is an OGC Reference implementation of several WCS related standards from
>>> I do have a reservation though:
>>> While I see that Rasdaman is meeting the requirements of the OSGeo
>>> Incubation process, I do feel that it is not meeting the spirit of
>>> As an example control of the project is still tightly controlled around
>>> Rasdaman GMbh:
>>> - Two of the three members of the Rasdaman PSC are members of Rasdaman
>>> - Project technical design and strategic directions are tightly
>>> controlled and do not appear to be openly discussed on public emailing
>>> lists. Things 'just happen'; and
>>> - The Rasdaman-PSC email list contains no emails .
>>> I do know of one or two attempts to try to get public discussion going
>>> about strategic technical direction, however I did not see much activity
>>> related to it. This is probably symptomatic of the lack of a serious
>>> attempt at community consultation on strategic and technical design issues
>>> to date.
>>> My advice to the Rasdaman Community is that for you to truly thrive as
>>> an open source community, you will need to look closely at this issue and
>>> address it proactively. It is your project!
>>> Bruce Bannerman
>>> OSGeo Mentor for Rasdaman
>>>  https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/rasdaman-psc
>>> The checklist ( <http://www.rasdaman.org/wiki/OSGeoIncubationChecklist>
>>> http://www.rasdaman.org/wiki/OSGeoIncubationChecklist) seems complete.
>>> The last communication from Bruce was also positive, but did not elicit a
>>> response from this mailing list.
>>> I recommend Bruce invite discussion/review of checklist and prep a
>>> recommendation for graduation (if he is comfortable doing so at this time).
>>> Jody Garnett
>>> On 21 April 2016 at 00:55, Peter Baumann <p.baumann at jacobs-university.de>
>>> Dear all,
>>> just a brief question, what are the plans about rasdaman incubation?
>>> Last communication was 7 months ago, and this April we had our 6th
>>> of entering incubation.
>>> thanks for sharing your thoughts,
>>> Dr. Peter Baumann
>>> - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
>>> mail: p.baumann at jacobs-university.de
>>> tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178
>>> - Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793)
>>> www.rasdaman.com, mail: baumann at rasdaman.com
>>> tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882
>>> "Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis
>>> ventis dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli
>>> destinata, nec preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD
>>> Incubator mailing list
>>> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>> Incubator mailing listIncubator at lists.osgeo.orghttp://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>> Cameron Shorter,
>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
>> 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
>> Incubator mailing listIncubator at lists.osgeo.orghttp://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>> Dr. Peter Baumann
>> - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
>> mail: p.baumann at jacobs-university.de
>> tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178
>> - Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793)
>> www.rasdaman.com, mail: baumann at rasdaman.com
>> tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882
>> "Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis ventis dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli destinata, nec preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD 1083)
>> Incubator mailing list
>> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
> Incubator mailing list
> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Incubator