[pycsw-devel] OSGeo Incubation status

[Tom Kralidis]

Hi Angelos:

On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:

> Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 01:37:10 +0200
> From: Angelos Tzotsos <gcpp.kalxas at gmail.com>
> To: Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis at gmail.com>
> Cc: Jeff McKenna <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>,
>     "pycsw-devel at lists.osgeo.org" <pycsw-devel at lists.osgeo.org>
> Subject: Re: [pycsw-devel] OSGeo Incubation status
> 
> Hi Tom,
>
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 3:31 AM, Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Thanks for the info.  The email approach is a great idea and lower
>> barrier IMHO.  Questions:
>>
>> - what constitutes a contributor?
>
>
> Good question. In OSGeoLive case, where SVN is used, this is
> straightforward: a contributor is the person with commit access to the
> central repository.
>
>
>> Official committers
>> (https://github.com/geopython/pycsw/blob/master/COMMITTERS.txt)?
>> Anyone who has ever contributed, including via GitHub pull requests?
>>
>
> In git case, the safe road IMHO is to accept a contribution (even through
> pull requests) after a similar e-mail is sent.
>
>
>> (https://github.com/geopython/pycsw/graphs/contributors)?  If anyone,
>> would we need them to additionally add their name/year in the source
>> code headers they have touched?
>
>
> No, adding name to source is not required unless if the contribution is
> significant and the contributor wants to claim copyright to that code.
>
>
>> Only core committers have done this
>> thus far
>>
>> - we have a section on contributing in
>>
>> https://github.com/geopython/pycsw/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.rst#contributions-and-licensing
>> .  We should update this section once we iron out how things will work
>> (process and email template).
>>
>
> I agree, we should iron out a template and then call for a PSC vote to
> enable this process.
>

I've updated the process and template in this pull request:

https://github.com/geopython/pycsw/pull/311

Specifically https://github.com/tomkralidis/pycsw/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.rst#contributions-and-licensing

Let's leave the PR open until we review the text, make mods and get PSC consensus (which needs a call for vote).

After this, we require legwork to track down contributors and get agreement (which should be a new GitHub issue).

>
>>
>> - what would our email template look like?  Proposed template for
>> review/comment:
>>
>> Subject: pycsw project licensing agreement
>>
>> Hi all, I'd like to contribute pycsw to TBD1. My TBD2 userid is: YYYY.
>> I confirm that my contributions to TBD1 will be compatible with the
>> TBD1 license guidelines at the time of contribution.
>>
>>
> Hi all, I'd like to contribute feature X to pycsw.
> I confirm that my contributions to pycsw will be compatible with the pycsw
> license guidelines at the time of contribution.
>
> Best,
> Angelos
>
>
>
>> TBD1: is this OSGeo?  Something else?
>>
>> TBD2: OSGeo userid?  GitHub userid?
>>
>>>>
>>>> Aside: is providing copyright to OSGeo a requirement or can we keep as
>>>> is?  Is this an exclusive copyright to OSGeo, or in addition to those
>>>> who have copyright already?
>>>
>>> No, it is not a requirement. We can keep as is.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Unless we are required clarify the above issues beforehand, I'm +1
>>>> with the updated checklist being good to go for Jeff to discuss
>>>> with/report to IncCom.
>>>>
>>>> ..Tom
>>>
>>>
>>> +1
>>> Angelos
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Angelos Tzotsos <gcpp.kalxas at gmail.com
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> After the completion of our Code Provenance Review [1], I think it is
>>>>> time
>>>>> to evaluate our OSGeo Incubation status.
>>>>> Our wiki page for incubation process is [2].
>>>>>
>>>>> According to OSGeo web site, the full incubation process is described
>>>>> here
>>>>> [3]. In this process, pycsw has completed tasks 1, 2, 3 and 4. We are
>>>>> currently placed between points 5 and 6:
>>>>>
>>>>> "5. The Incubation Mentor reports incubation progress to the IncCom
>>>>> periodically using the Project Graduation Checklist [4].
>>>>>   6. Incubation Projects remain in incubation until the Incubation
>> Mentor
>>>>> and
>>>>> the IncCom agree the project is ready for full status."
>>>>>
>>>>> Based on the above text, I think we need to merge documents [5] and [6]
>>>>> in
>>>>> favor of [6]. It is clearly stated that only the Project Graduation
>>>>> Checklist should be used to report our status to the Incubation
>>>>> Committee.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, we need to update our graduation checklist [6] to make sure that
>> it
>>>>> is
>>>>> up to date with upstream (OSGeo has updated this checklist [4] some
>>>>> months
>>>>> ago, bringing it to version 2.0).
>>>>> Then we need our mentor (Jeff) to discuss with the Incubation Committee
>>>>> about this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] https://github.com/geopython/pycsw/wiki/pycsw-Provenance-Review
>>>>> [2] https://github.com/geopython/pycsw/wiki/OSGeo-Incubation
>>>>> [3]I
>>>>> [4]
>>>>>
>> http://www.osgeo.org/incubator/process/project_graduation_checklist.html
>>>>> [5] https://github.com/geopython/pycsw/wiki/Project-Status
>>>>> [6]
>> https://github.com/geopython/pycsw/wiki/Project-Graduation-Checklist
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Angelos Tzotsos
>>>>> Remote Sensing Laboratory
>>>>> National Technical University of Athens
>>>>> http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> pycsw-devel mailing list
>>>>> pycsw-devel at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pycsw-devel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Angelos Tzotsos
>>> Remote Sensing Laboratory
>>> National Technical University of Athens
>>> http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Angelos Tzotsos
> Remote Sensing Laboratory
> National Technical University of Athens
> http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos
>