[SAC] Project Hosting

[Daniel Kastl]

Hi Chris,

Thank you for bringing up this topic and thank you for speaking for the
pgRouting project.
pgRouting discussed the pro and contra to apply for incubation, but it
didn't happen yet because of a few reasons:

   - We feel that pgRouting is quite small compared to other projects that
   passed incubation already, and we thought we could start as an OSGeo Labs
   project at first. Maybe we could find other similar projects to join then
   for incubation. I'm not sure OSGeo aims to be there for a large number of
   small projects rather than the "big" ones.
   Nevertheless we want to keep pgRouting on the GIS Live DVD and thought it
   might be a good idea to have at least mailing list and SVN hosted by OSGeo
   for now (I'm not sure a migration of TRAC is possible).
   - Second reason for not having started incubation yet: it seems to me
   that incubation requires quite some paperwork and efforts (pgRouting user
   base might be relatively large, but active developers isn't yet).
   Furthermore there are quite a few projects in incubation queue and I feel
   there is some lack of mentors.

There are alternatives for hosting like Github, Sourceforge or just some
company server, but we thought it would be best for the project to be less
tied to a single company and show our relation to OSGeo and make it more
attractive for others to join development.

Best regards,
Daniel




2010/6/14 <christopher.schmidt at nokia.com>

> Hi,
>
> pgRouting has requested project hosting via OSGeo:
>
>  http://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/ticket/561
>
> In general, I believe policy has been that a SAC member basically has
> to step up to support organizations if they want to be hosted by
> OSGeo (followed by rubber-stamping by the board, afaik).
>
> I'd like to suggest that in general, we should encourage projects
> which have a large, healthy community to pursue incubation (at least
> in the form of creating an application for incubation/demonstrating
> intent to pursue incubation). pgRouting is a mature project,
> well-documented, with a significant history in the OSGeo community
> (participation at conferences, etc.) There is no reason they
> should not be pursuing incubation that I can see.
>
> If a project is mature enough to be considered for incubation,
> but is not interested in pursuing incubation, I feel like SAC
> should take care in taking that project on as a hosting
> candidate.
>
> For projects that are small enough that incubation is not
> appropriate -- like TileCache/FeatureServer, as well as others that
> have requested incubation -- I'm fine with the current process,
> but I think that we should really do our best to encourage projects
> like pgRouting to become a part of the community via incubation,
> rather than just taking advantage of OSGeo's hosting capabilities.
>
> I'd be interested in any other opinions on this point.
>
> Best Regards,
> --
> Christopher Schmidt
> Nokia
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sac mailing list
> Sac at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/sac
>





-- 
Georepublic UG & Georepublic Japan
eMail: daniel.kastl at georepublic.de
Web: http://georepublic.de
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/sac/attachments/20100614/7d6140a9/attachment-0001.html