[Incubator] platforms discussion

Wed Sep 15 18:38:28 PDT 2021

There is a useful definition of a framework (quite technical) here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_framework

Software frameworks have these distinguishing features that separate them
> from libraries or normal user applications:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_framework
>
>    - inversion of control - In a framework, unlike in libraries or normal
>    user applications, the overall program's flow of control is not dictated by
>    the caller, but by the framework.[1]
>
>
>    - default behavior - A framework has a default behavior. This default
>    behavior must actually be some useful behavior and not a series of no-ops.
>
>
>    - extensibility - A framework can be extended by the user usually by
>    selective overriding or specialized by user code providing specific
>    functionality.
>
>
>    - non-modifiable framework code - The framework code, in general, is
>    not allowed to be modified. Users can extend the framework, but not modify
>    its code.
>
> While all of that is technically true it is perhaps a bit too detailed for
our purpose.

The core distinction is earlier in the thread:
- Does your open source code support a single website? Or is is setup for
use by others?
- Are you building a community around services? This is a user community ...
- Are you building a community around software? This is still a user
community ...
- Are you building a community around software where the software source
code is available to look at? This is still a user community ... looking at
you Elasticsearch
- Are you building a community around software with shared
responsibility and risk (enabled by a license to view *and change* source
code)? This is a free or open-source community (depending on which license
chosen by the group)

--
Jody Garnett

On Fri, 3 Sept 2021 at 18:32, Bruce Bannerman <
bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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/20210915/131cce96/attachment.html>