[mapguide-internals] RE: Project Sponsorship

Sun Nov 23 22:59:12 EST 2008

I completely agree that the majority of sponsorship interest from community
members will be around targeted bug fixes and feature development.  I also
agree that right now we're very limited by a small group of core developers
as being our only resource to assist in getting the bugs fixed and the
features developed.  Most MapGuide users simply do not have the skills to do
core development work so are reliant on the existing developer group.  The
existing developers are clearly starting to get frustrated that not many
other developers are jumping in, but it seems that there just aren't that
many folks with the right skills to help out in the ways that are needed.

I have actually offered to contribute money more than once (case in point,
$500 to Frank's plea for help) to specific items and nobody ever took me
(and others) up on these offers, regardless of whether there was an official
sponsorship model in place.  Based on this, I'm not overly optimistic that
it will have much effect unless the individual tasks are able to be treated
like profitable projects by the developers.  Much the same way it makes
sense for DM Solutions and other consultants to get paid by clients to do
development and contribute it back to the project.  Only in this case, it
wouldn't necessarily be for a specific client, but rather for the project
itself.

The bottom line: it hasn't seemed to matter how much money we've been
willing to throw at the project if we don't have the resources to do the
work...... Perhaps the sponsorship program will draw some worthy developers
out of the woodwork, so I think it's worth continuing to explore it.

Andy Morsell, P.E.
Spatial Integrators, Inc.
www.SpatialGIS.com

-----Original Message-----
From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
[mailto:mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Zac Spitzer
Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 6:00 PM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Project Sponsorship

Generally speaking, aside from general sponsorship for the general
stuff (build infrastructure), one of the main things
where i see organisations being interested in sponsorship is very
targeted bug/feature development.

To take the example of a company or individual deciding for example
they really need the GDAL FDO provider fixed
and deciding they want to commit their own resources to fixing this,
they really need mentoring

The classic example was Frank Warmerdam putting his hand up to resolve
this bug and asking for assistance from
a mapguide developer. His requests went unanswered (AFAIKT) and this
issue remains unresolved.

A similiar example is the CMAKE build process which Helio was (is) working
on

Currently, nearly all the development on Mapguide is being done via
Autodesk employees and as a result Autodesk
have a strong vested interest in the project, but this also forms a
barrier for external developers to get involved in the project.

Jason's idea of a portal manager, is being performed by the community
at them moment and that is working reasonably well.

What is really needed is a something like a 'development mentor /
champion' available within the Autodesk team who can
assist / guide external developers and capture this information along
the way, either via wiki articles or via the mailing list.

Making the build process simpler is critical, when a developer can
simply check the code out and build it and start hacking,
they are much more likely to actually start developing and
contributing code back to the project.

The current complexity of the build process means that a lot of people
start, getting stuck in build issues and loose interest.

http://how2map.blogspot.com/2008/11/mapguide-shaping-up.html

z

On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 11:53 AM, Jason Birch <Jason.Birch at nanaimo.ca>
wrote:
> I'd prefer to work out the details before going to vote; two votes  will
just slow down the process.
>
> Looking at the GDAL and OpenLayers examples, I believe that there are
quite a few differences in what we could feasibly apply the funds toward at
this point, primarily because of our developer/user mix.  However, some of
the important tenets (PSC directs the use of funds, sponsors get full
reporting on use of funds and feedback through annual questionairres, etc)
feel right to me.  I also think that we should have a mechanism for
sponsorship funds to be earmarked for specific PSC-approved projects,
assuming that at some point we find developers within the community
interested in undertaking this kind of work.
>
> Apart from the necessary infrastructure for continuous builds and
installer packaging, why do we need sponsorship, goals and specifics?  I've
got some thoughts, but I'd like to hear from everyone.
>
> Goals:
>  - Increase the level of community participation in the MapGuide
development process
>  - Enhance the quality of the project's communications (announcements,
tickets, release transparency, etc)
>  - Ensure that project is approachable by new users, especially in the
areas of documentation, code samples, initial install experience, etc.
>
> Potential uses (examples only, actual PSC-approved expenditures may
differ):
>  - Maintain project-specific infrastructure necessary to support a fully
open development environment -- OSGeo takes care of things like Trac, SVN,
and downloads very well for us, but seems to be under-resourced for
supporting a continuous build framework, especially for projects such as
ours which require strong Windows support.
>  - Partial funding for a portal manager, ensuring that tickets are
followed up, email issues are referred to the Trac system where appropriate,
new releases are tagged with best possible information on date, etc.
>  - Creation and maintenance of MapGuide installers/packages for a wider
range of operating systems
>
> I'm sure there is much more, and maybe some of these aren't in sync with
everyone's thinking.  There is also some thought to be given to what
sponsors can expect from this, other than higher quality software and
community recognition.
>
> Please let post to the group with your items, etc.  Clearly separate goals
from potential uses, and ensure that the uses can be tied back to specific
goals.  Once we get a bit of cohesiveness, this should all go in a wiki for
collaborative editing.
>
> For reference:
>
> http://www.gdal.org/sponsorship.html
> http://openlayers.org/sponsorship/
>
> Jason
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Paul Spencer
> Sent: Sat 2008-11-22 8:31 AM
> Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] RE: Project Sponsorship
>
> I'm also in favour of this.  The OpenLayers team has just finished a
> lengthy discussion on sponsorship and has developed some guidelines of
> how the sponsorship stuff will work for them (largely based on the
> GDAL experience and example).  I think we will need to develop a
> similar set of guidelines for sponsorship for MGOS and have the
> community and the PSC discuss it before we can formally go that route,
> but the PSC could vote to agree (or not) on sponsorship in general
> with the details to be decided on later by a second vote.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>
>

-- 
Zac Spitzer -
http://zacster.blogspot.com
http://ennoble.dreamhosters.com/mapguide-central/
+61 405 847 168
_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
mapguide-internals at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals