[osgeo4w-dev] OSGeo4W Governance

[Frank Warmerdam]

Jeff McKenna wrote:
> ...thinking further on this:
> 
> Maybe we have a process for acceptance of an OSGeo4W package:
> 
> - to be accepted into osgeo4w incubation:
>   - user documentation must exist on the osgeo4w trac wiki
>   - package must follow OSGeo4W technical standards (doesn't exist yet, 
> but i'm thinking 'use gdal 1.7, python 2.6, based on osgeo4w libraries, 
> etc)
>   - maintainer must input name in our package maintainers table (doesn't 
> exist yet)
>   - maintainer must join osgeo4w-dev mailing list
> - until acceptance, package cannot be made available in osgeo4w-setup.exe
> 
> Yes this means MOST of our packages are not acceptable and should be 
> removed from our live version, until these requirements are met.
> 
> Thoughts?

Jeff,

One reasonable point at which to apply such a "gateway function" would be
the assembly of a next-gen OSGeo4W aka "OSGeo4W 2.0" where we establish a
new set of basis package versions (GDAL, Python, etc).

We currently do not have much restriction on peoples ability to incorporate
packages into OSGeo4W.  Basically, if you have "ldap shell" access you can
add and change packages.  I'd prefer to keep any rules on acceptance based
on conventions rather than software enforcement or we may make it quite a
bit harder to be a packager and drive contributors away.

We would also need at least some degree of agreement on an appropriate
level of OSGeo4W specific user documentation.

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