[Live-demo] "descoping" OSGeo-Live

[James Klassen]

Speaking as a member of the GeoMoose PSC and as one of the people who keeps
GeoMoose up to date in OSGeo-Live...  It isn't clear to me what to do about
it but for the record OpenHub seems to be pretty confused about GeoMoose.

It is missing our early history (2005-2009).  It is confused about our
recent history (probably because of our use of git submodules).  And it is
completely unaware of our 3.0 developments (which are happening in new
repos, incidently because we want to move away from git submodules).

As a project we would much rather be putting our time into maintaining
2.9.x and into the current effort to moderize our project for what will
become our 3.0 release than worring about how to get a black box (OpenHub)
to properly understand our project's history.  Maybe when things quiet down
OpenHub tinkering will make it to the top of the list, but I don't see that
being the case anytime soon.

On Apr 20, 2017 3:38 AM, "Cameron Shorter" <cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Activity Workshop,
>
> Yes, you make some good points, there are a number of things we should be
> considering when selecting a project for OSGeo-Live. A more detailed list
> is provided in our application form:
>
> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc_Apply
>
> Cheers, Cameron
>
> On 20/4/17 4:54 am, Activity Workshop wrote:
>
>> On 14/04/17 21:00, live-demo-request at lists.osgeo.org wrote:
>>
>>> While projects should rightly be concerned if OSGeo-Live only uses
>>> OpenHub metrics to assess project health, they should be significantly
>>> more concerned about the general public's assessment of their project.
>>>
>> You're correct to say that these metrics should not be the only criterion
>> for
>> removing projects from OSGeo-Live.  There are so many other (in my view
>> more
>> important) factors to consider:
>> - is the software useful?  Is the software reliable?
>> - is the inclusion straightforward or does it require lots of building /
>> packaging / patching / dependency-resolution work from the OSGeo-Live
>> team?
>> - does it take up a lot of disk space?
>> - is the team responsive to questions from the OSGeo-Live team, are the
>> developers helpful with providing information and documentation?
>> - and many other factors too of course.
>>
>> I think it should be a priority of all projects to try an ensure their
>>> OpenHub metrics reflect the true health of their project ...
>>>
>> Well, OpenHub (BlackDuck) is a company.  If (in your opinion) their
>> numbers
>> aren't providing a useful picture then it is arguable whether this should
>> be put
>> at the door of all the unpaid open software developers, or alternatively
>> at the
>> door of the company's staff and systems.
>>
>> Regards,
>> activityworkshop
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Live-demo mailing list
>> Live-demo at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/live-demo
>> http://live.osgeo.org
>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc
>>
>
> --
> Cameron Shorter
> M +61 419 142 254
>
> _______________________________________________
> Live-demo mailing list
> Live-demo at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/live-demo
> http://live.osgeo.org
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/osgeolive/attachments/20170420/c5b71bac/attachment.html>