[Mapserver-dev] MapServer Core Team Formation?

[Frank Warmerdam]

Steve / Daniel / Sean,

You guys might have seen the "rotated map" proposal I sent to the mapserver-dev
list this morning.  While I was writing it up, I was thinking a bit about
how we would resolve it if there was a significant dispute over whether it
should be done or not.

Some projects I am aware of (i.e.. Apache, FreeBSD) have a formal concept of a
"core team" or some other formally recognised group of people who as group
would make decisions on difficult issues when consensus fails.  On the OpenEV
project, the "core team" are developers with commit access and we (the core
team) vote on new members before they are admitted.   In case of dispute on
a new feature or architectural change the core team would vote.

I am wondering if we should have something similar for MapServer.  As
MapServer becomes increasingly economically important to a variety of
companies and individuals there will definitely come times when different
priorities raise issues.  I would like a clear dispute resolution mechanism
to be available.

Assuming you agree there is some value in such a thing, I see the following
as some issues we might want to address:

  o Is this just a developer level thing, or should be trying to give
    other stakeholders such as end users, contributors in other areas like
    documentation or more management level folks like Dave and Tom a voice?

  o Should we try and provide a broad enough membership that one organization
    (i.e.. DMSolutions or UMN) doesn't dominate.

  o What are the "powers" of the core team.  A fairly narrow view might be
    control of CVS commit permission on the mapserver tree for people and
    features along with decisions on release issues (when to release, what
    goes in, is it ready).

  o Do we prefer a chief and lieutenant model like Linux?  ie. Steve might
    be overall chief, with Daniel being PHP MapScript lieutenant, me
    the raster lieutenant, Sean the non-PHP MapScript lieutenant and so on.

Things I would not particularly want to see:
  o This becoming so formal that there was a real "legal" aspect.  I prefer
    an understood and agreed convention.

  o This becoming too disconnected from the developers.  I wouldn't want it
    to be dominated by managers or end users.  The idea is primarily to
    help those of use who are directly contributing to the source tree
    to cooperate smoothly and fairly.

Ideally, I would like us to present some sort of arrangement at the MUM and
ask for wider feedback before committing ourselves to it.  What would be an
appropriate venue to discuss this at MUM?  A presentation?  Panel discussion?
Closing plenary?

Best regards,
-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam at pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent