[Incubator] PyWPS update

[Cameron Shorter]

Hi Tom,

I'd probably err on the selection of PyWPS 4. I assume that moving 
forward most people will select the use of PyWPS 4? If that is the case, 
I'd suggest that PyWPS 4 should be used as the basis for incubation.

You should be able to claim credit for work already done on PyWPS 3. 
Where required, just reference back to the original work and note the 
changes.

Warm regards, Cameron


On 14/09/2016 8:12 AM, Tom Kralidis wrote:
> Jody: so unless there is objection will continue to work through PyWPS
> 3 for incubation per the below clarifications?
>
> Thanks
>
> ..Tom
>
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 8:44 PM, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thanks for the explanation, and yeah it will be much easier to change
>> license with an all new codebase.
>>
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 12 September 2016 at 19:06, Jachym Cepicky <jachym.cepicky at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Jody,
>>>
>>> just to clarify some questions:
>>>
>>> PyWPS-3 and PyWPS-4 are living in the same repository [2], but PyWPS-4 has
>>> completely new code base rewritten from scratch.
>>>
>>> We discussed the topic about license change only in the relationship with
>>> PyWPS-4. PyWPS-3 - is GNU/GPL (no change), PyWPS-4 is MIT (no relationship).
>>>
>>> Still, we managed to track down 99.99% of PyWPS-* constributions [1].
>>>
>>> We are incubating PyWPS-3 now, but even we've started PyWPS-4 from
>>> scratch, the second is direct successor of the first. OpenLayers-3 vs.
>>> OpenLayers-2 is similar case IMHO, except for the license change, but the
>>> code base is also completely new and (afaik?) nobody questioned the fact.
>>> that even OpenLayer-2 was incubated, it applies automatically to OL3 too
>>> (just as an example, which I see very close).
>>>
>>> Jachym
>>>
>>> [1]  https://github.com/geopython/pywps/issues/124
>>> [2]  https://github.com/geopython/pywps
>>>
>>> po 12. 9. 2016 v 7:25 odesílatel Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com>
>>> napsal:
>>>> G'Day Tom, great to hear from the project!
>>>>
>>>> I am not really sure what to make of the PyWPS 3 vs PyWPS 4 question - I
>>>> do not think anything like that has been asked before. I had always assumed
>>>> that a development team was going ahead and reviewing their current code
>>>> base?
>>>>
>>>> Are both codebases still active? Is PyWPS 4 based on PyWPS 3 codebase in
>>>> any way?
>>>>
>>>> For incubation, the process of reviewing the codebase and double checking
>>>> that the contents are in fact open source is what is important. We do our
>>>> best to trust the project teams procedures to ensure the codebase remains
>>>> open source after incubation. Those procedures usually focus on ensuring
>>>> contributions are either open source, or contributed under a license that
>>>> allows open source distribution. But it is really up to the team (conducting
>>>> an additional review/audit, or having an external party to review) are not
>>>> un head of.
>>>>
>>>> License changes are fine, but tricky - usually need to contact all the
>>>> contributors (or have the code provided under a contribution license which
>>>> permits the PSC to change license).
>>>>
>>>> The PSC can transfer copyright to OSGeo at any point (it does not need to
>>>> take place during incubation, it is just a "service" that OSGeo can provide
>>>> since it is a legal entity). Clarification - the PSC can only transfer
>>>> copyright to OSGeo if it was a legal entity. If not the PSC ends up hunting
>>>> down all the contributors (as we did for the GeoTools project) and asking
>>>> them each to sign a contribution agreement one at a time...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jody Garnett
>>>>
>>>> On 11 September 2016 at 00:54, Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi all: FYI update on PyWPS incubation: PyWPS has made much progress
>>>>> in the last months (see [1]), with a few remaining tasks before bringing
>>>>> the project forward.
>>>>>
>>>>> As project mentor I'm looking for clarification/guidance on the
>>>>> following:
>>>>>
>>>>> - our (8 year old) incubation process is rooted in PyWPS 3.  Since then
>>>>> PyWPS 4 has been in development which includes a change in
>>>>> license (the project is at the 4.0.0-rc2 stage). Are there any issues
>>>>> with
>>>>> us continuing on the PyWPS 3 path for OSGeo Incubation? Note we have
>>>>> kept on the PyWPS 3 path for incubation by design to be consistent with
>>>>> our approved inbucation process, as well as relevant activities (PyWPS 3
>>>>> is now a part of OSGeo-Live for example), and given PyWPS 4 is not
>>>>> final, or mature for that matter
>>>>>
>>>>> - transfer copyright to OSGeo: this is in discussion in [2].  If we did
>>>>> decide
>>>>> to do this, when does this happen?  Before the provenance review? As
>>>>> part
>>>>> of the Project Graduation Checklist?  Something else?
>>>>>
>>>>> Clarification/guidance would be much appreciated at this point, given we
>>>>> are
>>>>> just about to start the provenance review.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> ..Tom
>>>>>
>>>>> [1]
>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/pywps-dev/2016-September/000889.html
>>>>> [2] https://github.com/geopython/pywps/issues/84#issuecomment-189980128
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Incubator mailing list
>>>>> 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
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Incubator mailing list
> Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator

-- 
Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254