[Incubator] platforms discussion

[Bruce Bannerman]

Jody,

I don’t expect anything constructive from the AGM. People won’t have time to reflect.

…now what is a ‘Framework’?

I suggest that we define what we support and take it from there. We can always adjust, if required.

Kind regards,

Bruce

> On 4 Sep 2021, at 05:27, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Thanks Bruce,
> 
> I did not get anything useful from the board; perhaps it is a subject for the AGM.
> 
> For now the way forward seems to be to recast the platform as a framework and ensure the resulting software stack and be picked up and run independently (with a quickstart or similar).
> --
> Jody Garnett
> 
> 
>> On Wed, 14 Jul 2021 at 21:57, Bruce Bannerman <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thanks Jody,
>> 
>> Personally:
>> 
>> I don’t mind a situation where an open source project attempts to develop and maintain software that is intended to integrate a number of software components into a working product which could perhaps be called a platform.
>> 
>> I can see many situations where the ‘platform’ might deploy both components and the platform’s specific customisations concurrently.
>> 
>> However, I would not support a situation where that product (or platform) can only be implemented once. I’d prefer that it can be implemented many times by different organisations.
>> 
>> While such a ‘platform’ project would look after its own "integration related software", I’d see that the individual components would be subject to their own open source project community’s governance practices.
>> 
>> This could get quite messy, when the integration related software is actually a customisation of an existing software component with its own open source community already in existence. This would require careful and close collaboration between both communities…
>> 
>> That will do for now, let’s see what others think.
>> 
>> Kind regards,
>> 
>> Bruce
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 15 Jul 2021, at 01:21, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> It is indeed overloaded, and no I cannot clarify as the applicants that are coming in are slightly different from each other.
>>> 
>>> Turn-key portals such as https://www.osgeo.org/choose-a-project/information-technology/portal/ these showcase a range of projects. Some like geomoose are presented as frameworks, others like GC2/Vidi are presented as a platform.
>>> 
>>> I would be cautious about an open source project that just supports a single website (like http://github.com/mapstory), but perhaps that is my own bias? There is an advantage to users of a platform being able to review the code responsible for the service they are using. But this represents new ground for OSGeo, hence the discussion.
>>> 
>>> I also brought this discussion to the osgeo board list; so we do not need to decide on our own.
>>> --
>>> Jody Garnett
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 at 18:56, Bruce Bannerman <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi Jody,
>>>> 
>>>> The concept of a platform is quite overloaded and means different things to different people.
>>>> 
>>>> Can you please clarify what you mean by ‘platform’?
>>>> 
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Bruce
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> > On 12 Jul 2021, at 18:30, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > 
>>>> > Discussion topic for incubation committee:
>>>> > 
>>>> > We are getting applications from platforms seeking to join OSGeo.
>>>> > 
>>>> > What do you think?
>>>> > --
>>>> > Jody Garnett
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > Incubator mailing list
>>>> > Incubator at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>>>> 
>> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/incubator/attachments/20210904/1f91bbe4/attachment.html>