[Incubator] platforms discussion

Jody Garnett jody.garnett at gmail.com
Wed Sep 29 14:54:24 PDT 2021 

The other venue is the upcoming board meeting, perhaps add to agenda?
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2021-10-03
--
Jody Garnett


On Fri, 24 Sept 2021 at 08:46, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com> wrote:

> Bruce:
>
> I think these two questions: open source platforms, and handling of dual
> license, would be a good topic for the AGM next week. The actual AGM is a
> recorded video and the time slot is intended to be a Q&A?
>
> Jody
>
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 5:31 PM Bruce Bannerman <
> bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Jody,
>>
>> These thoughts extend on your ‘there can be only one’ comment below.
>>
>> I think that we in the Incubation Committee and our potential future
>> incubating projects would benefit from our better defining what type of
>> open source project we will support.
>>
>> Greg Troxel contributed valuable insight into a discussion that we were
>> having in the OSGeo Standards list on the proposed OGC/OSGeo MOU. See [1]
>> for context.
>>
>> With apologies to Greg for my paraphrasing, I understand Greg’s arguments
>> to strongly differentiate between open source projects that are subject to
>> proprietary relicensing and those that are not.
>>
>> Greg contributed the blog link at [2] as part of the discussion. This is
>> an insightful read.
>>
>> If we had had a clear policy on the type of open source project that we
>> are willing to support during the unfortunate situation with the Rasdaman
>> Incubation vote, we could have avoided a lot of the angst and
>> miscommunication that occurred on both sides.
>>
>> So before we progress too much further on the ‘Platforms’ discussion, I
>> think that it would be beneficial to resolve the OSGeo Incubation supported
>> open source model issue definitively.  I believe that this will make it
>> much easier to progress the platforms discussion, and future incubations.
>>
>> While I have concerns over the interpretation of what a Contributions
>> Licence is, I believe that the links at [1] and [2] are a good starting
>> point to get this sorted out.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Bruce
>>
>> [1]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/standards/2021-September/001274.html
>>
>> [2] https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2020/jan/06/copyleft-equality/
>>
>>
>> On 17 Sep 2021, at 01:59, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> 
>>
>> It is kind of like the “highlander-principle” if the phrase “there can be
>> only one” applies … you are not open source.
>>
>> Jody
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 6:38 PM Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> --
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/incubator/attachments/20210929/5103d872/attachment.html>

More information about the Incubator mailing list