discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
21 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

jody.garnett
I am staring a new thread so the marketing committee can focus on the printing deadline for boston.

Projects are starting to update to the new branding which is great - we have two branding available:


Projects that are part of our incubation process fall under community projects, they have met our standards for being open source, spatial and participatory and are being promoted as part of our foundation along side their fellow community projects pgrouting and geowebcache.


The larger story is the focus not on our foundation, but on the software projects and outreach.

* As such the incubation process is no longer called out on our website (or in our branding) because it does not have any significance to website visitors. Incubation is an internal process of our software foundation - it does not earn its keep introducing a "third branding" if we cannot explain succinctly what it actually means for potential users of the software.

* The board introduced the idea of community projects in response to a call to be more inclusive and allow innovation

* Including more projects in our community does not detract from the projects that were already in our community. We are doing more for software projects at OSGeo to help everyone.

We have been avoiding a difficult conversation on osgeo project quality on and off since January. At our most recent F2F meeting we took some action items to hear a report from Maxi and Jeff McKenna (in Boston? details still be arranged). The question of what we have to offer community projects and osgeo projects, and what we expect in return, should be considered in one go to be fair to everyone.
--
Jody Garnett

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

Venkatesh Raghavan-2
Comments below;

On 8/1/2017 11:17 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:

> I am staring a new thread so the marketing committee can focus on the
> printing deadline for boston.
>
> Projects are starting to update to the new branding which is great - we
> have two branding available:
>
> - https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/tree/master/incubation/project
> - https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/tree/master/incubation/community
>
> Projects that are part of our incubation process fall under community
> projects, they have met our standards for being open source, spatial and
> participatory and are being promoted as part of our foundation along side
> their fellow community projects pgrouting and geowebcache.
> .
> For reference the prior branding is here
> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Community_Projects#Comparison_with_Incubation

I propose the continued use of the same branding shown in the URL
above with projects categorized as "OSGeo Project", "OSGeo Incubation
Project" and "OSGeo Community Project".

Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
how it was approved.

Best

Venka

>
> The larger story is the focus not on our foundation, but on the software
> projects and outreach.
>
> * As such the incubation process is no longer called out on our website (or
> in our branding) because it does not have any significance to website
> visitors. Incubation is an internal process of our software foundation - it
> does not earn its keep introducing a "third branding" if we cannot explain
> succinctly what it actually means for potential users of the software.
>
> * The board introduced the idea of community projects in response to a call
> to be more inclusive and allow innovation
>
> * Including more projects in our community does not detract from the
> projects that were already in our community. We are doing more for software
> projects at OSGeo to help everyone.
>
> We have been avoiding a difficult conversation on osgeo project quality on
> and off since January. At our most recent F2F meeting we took some action
> items to hear a report from Maxi and Jeff McKenna (in Boston? details still
> be arranged). The question of what we have to offer community projects and
> osgeo projects, and what we expect in return, should be considered in one
> go to be fair to everyone.
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

Helena Mitasova-7

On Aug 1, 2017, at 10:27 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]> wrote:

Comments below;

On 8/1/2017 11:17 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
I am staring a new thread so the marketing committee can focus on the
printing deadline for boston.

Projects are starting to update to the new branding which is great - we
have two branding available:

- https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/tree/master/incubation/project
- https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/tree/master/incubation/community

Projects that are part of our incubation process fall under community
projects,

who and when made a decision about this? 

they have met our standards for being open source, spatial and
participatory and are being promoted as part of our foundation along side
their fellow community projects pgrouting and geowebcache.
.
For reference the prior branding is here
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Community_Projects#Comparison_with_Incubation

I propose the continued use of the same branding shown in the URL
above with projects categorized as "OSGeo Project", "OSGeo Incubation Project" and "OSGeo Community Project”.

this is exactly what I asked for at the meeting at GetInteractive

Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
how it was approved.

I totally agree - see my note above,

Helena


Best

Venka


The larger story is the focus not on our foundation, but on the software
projects and outreach.

* As such the incubation process is no longer called out on our website (or
in our branding) because it does not have any significance to website
visitors. Incubation is an internal process of our software foundation - it
does not earn its keep introducing a "third branding" if we cannot explain
succinctly what it actually means for potential users of the software.

* The board introduced the idea of community projects in response to a call
to be more inclusive and allow innovation

* Including more projects in our community does not detract from the
projects that were already in our community. We are doing more for software
projects at OSGeo to help everyone.

We have been avoiding a difficult conversation on osgeo project quality on
and off since January. At our most recent F2F meeting we took some action
items to hear a report from Maxi and Jeff McKenna (in Boston? details still
be arranged). The question of what we have to offer community projects and
osgeo projects, and what we expect in return, should be considered in one
go to be fair to everyone.
--
Jody Garnett



_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board


_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board

Helena Mitasova
Professor at the Department of Marine, 
Earth, and Atmospheric Sciences
and Center for Geospatial Analytics
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC 27695-8208
"All electronic mail messages in connection with State business which are sent to or received by this account are subject to the NC Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.” 


_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

Venkatesh Raghavan-2
Comments below;

On 8/2/2017 12:09 AM, Helena Mitasova wrote:

>
>> On Aug 1, 2017, at 10:27 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Comments below;
>>
>> On 8/1/2017 11:17 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>> I am staring a new thread so the marketing committee can focus on the
>>> printing deadline for boston.
>>>
>>> Projects are starting to update to the new branding which is great - we
>>> have two branding available:
>>>
>>> - https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/tree/master/incubation/project
>>> - https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/tree/master/incubation/community
>>>
>>> Projects that are part of our incubation process fall under community
>>> projects,
>
> who and when made a decision about this?

And, I also see the "Project Incubation" logo at
https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/blob/master/incubation/OSGeo_incubation.svg

Let us continue to use it to provide visibility to projects
being incubated.

Venka


>
>>> they have met our standards for being open source, spatial and
>>> participatory and are being promoted as part of our foundation along side
>>> their fellow community projects pgrouting and geowebcache.
>>> .
>>> For reference the prior branding is here
>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Community_Projects#Comparison_with_Incubation
>>
>> I propose the continued use of the same branding shown in the URL
>> above with projects categorized as "OSGeo Project", "OSGeo Incubation Project" and "OSGeo Community Project”.
>
> this is exactly what I asked for at the meeting at GetInteractive
>>
>> Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
>> of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
>> how it was approved.
>
> I totally agree - see my note above,
>
> Helena
>
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Venka
>>
>>>
>>> The larger story is the focus not on our foundation, but on the software
>>> projects and outreach.
>>>
>>> * As such the incubation process is no longer called out on our website (or
>>> in our branding) because it does not have any significance to website
>>> visitors. Incubation is an internal process of our software foundation - it
>>> does not earn its keep introducing a "third branding" if we cannot explain
>>> succinctly what it actually means for potential users of the software.
>>>
>>> * The board introduced the idea of community projects in response to a call
>>> to be more inclusive and allow innovation
>>>
>>> * Including more projects in our community does not detract from the
>>> projects that were already in our community. We are doing more for software
>>> projects at OSGeo to help everyone.
>>>
>>> We have been avoiding a difficult conversation on osgeo project quality on
>>> and off since January. At our most recent F2F meeting we took some action
>>> items to hear a report from Maxi and Jeff McKenna (in Boston? details still
>>> be arranged). The question of what we have to offer community projects and
>>> osgeo projects, and what we expect in return, should be considered in one
>>> go to be fair to everyone.
>>> --
>>> Jody Garnett
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Board mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>
> Helena Mitasova
> Professor at the Department of Marine,
> Earth, and Atmospheric Sciences
> and Center for Geospatial Analytics
> North Carolina State University
> Raleigh, NC 27695-8208
> [hidden email]
> http://geospatial.ncsu.edu/osgeorel/publications.html <http://geospatial.ncsu.edu/osgeorel/publications.html>
>
> "All electronic mail messages in connection with State business which are sent to or received by this account are subject to the NC Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.”
>
>

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

jody.garnett
That is the branding for the incubation committee.

--
Jody Garnett

On 1 August 2017 at 08:24, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]> wrote:
Comments below;

On 8/2/2017 12:09 AM, Helena Mitasova wrote:

On Aug 1, 2017, at 10:27 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]> wrote:

Comments below;

On 8/1/2017 11:17 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
I am staring a new thread so the marketing committee can focus on the
printing deadline for boston.

Projects are starting to update to the new branding which is great - we
have two branding available:

- https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/tree/master/incubation/project
- https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/tree/master/incubation/community

Projects that are part of our incubation process fall under community
projects,

who and when made a decision about this?

And, I also see the "Project Incubation" logo at
https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/blob/master/incubation/OSGeo_incubation.svg

Let us continue to use it to provide visibility to projects
being incubated.

Venka



they have met our standards for being open source, spatial and
participatory and are being promoted as part of our foundation along side
their fellow community projects pgrouting and geowebcache.
.
For reference the prior branding is here
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Community_Projects#Comparison_with_Incubation

I propose the continued use of the same branding shown in the URL
above with projects categorized as "OSGeo Project", "OSGeo Incubation Project" and "OSGeo Community Project”.

this is exactly what I asked for at the meeting at GetInteractive

Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
how it was approved.

I totally agree - see my note above,

Helena


Best

Venka


The larger story is the focus not on our foundation, but on the software
projects and outreach.

* As such the incubation process is no longer called out on our website (or
in our branding) because it does not have any significance to website
visitors. Incubation is an internal process of our software foundation - it
does not earn its keep introducing a "third branding" if we cannot explain
succinctly what it actually means for potential users of the software.

* The board introduced the idea of community projects in response to a call
to be more inclusive and allow innovation

* Including more projects in our community does not detract from the
projects that were already in our community. We are doing more for software
projects at OSGeo to help everyone.

We have been avoiding a difficult conversation on osgeo project quality on
and off since January. At our most recent F2F meeting we took some action
items to hear a report from Maxi and Jeff McKenna (in Boston? details still
be arranged). The question of what we have to offer community projects and
osgeo projects, and what we expect in return, should be considered in one
go to be fair to everyone.
--
Jody Garnett



_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board


_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board

Helena Mitasova
Professor at the Department of Marine,
Earth, and Atmospheric Sciences
and Center for Geospatial Analytics
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC 27695-8208
[hidden email]
http://geospatial.ncsu.edu/osgeorel/publications.html <http://geospatial.ncsu.edu/osgeorel/publications.html>

"All electronic mail messages in connection with State business which are sent to or received by this account are subject to the NC Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.”





_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

Venkatesh Raghavan-2
On 8/2/2017 12:32 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> That is the branding for the incubation committee.

Well, it seems that neither me not Helena approve this
unilateral decision by the incubation committee.

So, either we maintain status quo regarding project
categorization or have the board voting to approve
any change.

Venka

>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
> On 1 August 2017 at 08:24, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Comments below;
>>
>> On 8/2/2017 12:09 AM, Helena Mitasova wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 1, 2017, at 10:27 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Comments below;
>>>>
>>>> On 8/1/2017 11:17 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I am staring a new thread so the marketing committee can focus on the
>>>>> printing deadline for boston.
>>>>>
>>>>> Projects are starting to update to the new branding which is great - we
>>>>> have two branding available:
>>>>>
>>>>> - https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/tree/master/incubation/project
>>>>> - https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/tree/master/incubation/community
>>>>>
>>>>> Projects that are part of our incubation process fall under community
>>>>> projects,
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> who and when made a decision about this?
>>>
>>
>> And, I also see the "Project Incubation" logo at
>> https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/blob/master/incubation/OSGeo_incubation.svg
>>
>> Let us continue to use it to provide visibility to projects
>> being incubated.
>>
>> Venka
>>
>>
>>
>>> they have met our standards for being open source, spatial and
>>>>> participatory and are being promoted as part of our foundation along
>>>>> side
>>>>> their fellow community projects pgrouting and geowebcache.
>>>>> .
>>>>> For reference the prior branding is here
>>>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Community_Projects#Compari
>>>>> son_with_Incubation
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I propose the continued use of the same branding shown in the URL
>>>> above with projects categorized as "OSGeo Project", "OSGeo Incubation
>>>> Project" and "OSGeo Community Project”.
>>>>
>>>
>>> this is exactly what I asked for at the meeting at GetInteractive
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
>>>> of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
>>>> how it was approved.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I totally agree - see my note above,
>>>
>>> Helena
>>>
>>>
>>>> Best
>>>>
>>>> Venka
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The larger story is the focus not on our foundation, but on the software
>>>>> projects and outreach.
>>>>>
>>>>> * As such the incubation process is no longer called out on our website
>>>>> (or
>>>>> in our branding) because it does not have any significance to website
>>>>> visitors. Incubation is an internal process of our software foundation
>>>>> - it
>>>>> does not earn its keep introducing a "third branding" if we cannot
>>>>> explain
>>>>> succinctly what it actually means for potential users of the software.
>>>>>
>>>>> * The board introduced the idea of community projects in response to a
>>>>> call
>>>>> to be more inclusive and allow innovation
>>>>>
>>>>> * Including more projects in our community does not detract from the
>>>>> projects that were already in our community. We are doing more for
>>>>> software
>>>>> projects at OSGeo to help everyone.
>>>>>
>>>>> We have been avoiding a difficult conversation on osgeo project quality
>>>>> on
>>>>> and off since January. At our most recent F2F meeting we took some
>>>>> action
>>>>> items to hear a report from Maxi and Jeff McKenna (in Boston? details
>>>>> still
>>>>> be arranged). The question of what we have to offer community projects
>>>>> and
>>>>> osgeo projects, and what we expect in return, should be considered in
>>>>> one
>>>>> go to be fair to everyone.
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jody Garnett
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Board mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Board mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>>
>>>
>>> Helena Mitasova
>>> Professor at the Department of Marine,
>>> Earth, and Atmospheric Sciences
>>> and Center for Geospatial Analytics
>>> North Carolina State University
>>> Raleigh, NC 27695-8208
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://geospatial.ncsu.edu/osgeorel/publications.html <
>>> http://geospatial.ncsu.edu/osgeorel/publications.html>
>>>
>>> "All electronic mail messages in connection with State business which are
>>> sent to or received by this account are subject to the NC Public Records
>>> Law and may be disclosed to third parties.”
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

jody.garnett
In reply to this post by Helena Mitasova-7

who and when made a decision about this? 

I made this request and direction as the incubation committee representative for the website rebranding project.
Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
how it was approved.

The categorization has not changed, these projects are part of the incubation process.

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

jody.garnett
In reply to this post by Venkatesh Raghavan-2
I am happy to have a meeting about this; I do ask that the broader story of communication, and what osgeo projects are for be considered.


--
Jody Garnett

On 1 August 2017 at 08:43, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 8/2/2017 12:32 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
That is the branding for the incubation committee.

Well, it seems that neither me not Helena approve this
unilateral decision by the incubation committee.

So, either we maintain status quo regarding project
categorization or have the board voting to approve
any change.

Venka



--
Jody Garnett

On 1 August 2017 at 08:24, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]> wrote:

Comments below;

On 8/2/2017 12:09 AM, Helena Mitasova wrote:


On Aug 1, 2017, at 10:27 AM, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]>
wrote:

Comments below;

On 8/1/2017 11:17 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:

I am staring a new thread so the marketing committee can focus on the
printing deadline for boston.

Projects are starting to update to the new branding which is great - we
have two branding available:

- https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/tree/master/incubation/project
- https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/tree/master/incubation/community

Projects that are part of our incubation process fall under community
projects,


who and when made a decision about this?


And, I also see the "Project Incubation" logo at
https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/blob/master/incubation/OSGeo_incubation.svg

Let us continue to use it to provide visibility to projects
being incubated.

Venka



they have met our standards for being open source, spatial and
participatory and are being promoted as part of our foundation along
side
their fellow community projects pgrouting and geowebcache.
.
For reference the prior branding is here
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Community_Projects#Compari
son_with_Incubation


I propose the continued use of the same branding shown in the URL
above with projects categorized as "OSGeo Project", "OSGeo Incubation
Project" and "OSGeo Community Project”.


this is exactly what I asked for at the meeting at GetInteractive


Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
how it was approved.


I totally agree - see my note above,

Helena


Best

Venka


The larger story is the focus not on our foundation, but on the software
projects and outreach.

* As such the incubation process is no longer called out on our website
(or
in our branding) because it does not have any significance to website
visitors. Incubation is an internal process of our software foundation
- it
does not earn its keep introducing a "third branding" if we cannot
explain
succinctly what it actually means for potential users of the software.

* The board introduced the idea of community projects in response to a
call
to be more inclusive and allow innovation

* Including more projects in our community does not detract from the
projects that were already in our community. We are doing more for
software
projects at OSGeo to help everyone.

We have been avoiding a difficult conversation on osgeo project quality
on
and off since January. At our most recent F2F meeting we took some
action
items to hear a report from Maxi and Jeff McKenna (in Boston? details
still
be arranged). The question of what we have to offer community projects
and
osgeo projects, and what we expect in return, should be considered in
one
go to be fair to everyone.
--
Jody Garnett



_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board


_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board


Helena Mitasova
Professor at the Department of Marine,
Earth, and Atmospheric Sciences
and Center for Geospatial Analytics
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC 27695-8208
[hidden email]
http://geospatial.ncsu.edu/osgeorel/publications.html <
http://geospatial.ncsu.edu/osgeorel/publications.html>

"All electronic mail messages in connection with State business which are
sent to or received by this account are subject to the NC Public Records
Law and may be disclosed to third parties.”








_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

Venkatesh Raghavan
In reply to this post by jody.garnett
....
On 8/2/2017 12:44 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
how it was approved.


The categorization has not changed, these projects are part of the
incubation process.
Then let us  continue to use the "OSGeo Incubation logo" and provide
visibility to our projects in incubation.




_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board



_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

jody.garnett
Venka they are visible as community projects on the website and our promotion.

Venka is there any reason for projects that are in our incubation process to be considered for more visibility then our community projects?

--
Jody Garnett

On 1 August 2017 at 08:49, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]> wrote:
....
On 8/2/2017 12:44 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
how it was approved.


The categorization has not changed, these projects are part of the
incubation process.
Then let us  continue to use the "OSGeo Incubation logo" and provide
visibility to our projects in incubation.


      

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board




_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

Venkatesh Raghavan
On 8/2/2017 12:51 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> Venka they are visible as community projects on the website and our
> promotion.

Jody Community projects and "projects in incubation" were different and
are listed
as such on our present website. The decision to put them together (as a
part of
re-branding) was neither informed to or approved by the board.

All project in incubation can display on their project leaflet and
website they
they are striving to graduate as an OSGeo project and undergoing our
software vetting process.

> Venka is there any reason for projects that are in our incubation process
> to be considered for more visibility then our community projects?
Jody I never talked about more visibility or less. I said that Project
in Incubation
must be shown as such with appropriate logo.
Why? Because they are taking steps to graduate as OSGeo projects and because
that is how it was before changes were made without information or
approval from the board. Even the PSC of project under incubation were
not informed about this.


>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
> On 1 August 2017 at 08:49, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]
>> wrote:
>> ....
>> On 8/2/2017 12:44 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>
>> Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
>> of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
>> how it was approved.
>>
>>
>>
>> The categorization has not changed, these projects are part of the
>> incubation process.
>>
>> Then let us  continue to use the "OSGeo Incubation logo" and provide
>> visibility to our projects in incubation.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing [hidden email]://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>
>>
>>

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

jody.garnett
On 1 August 2017 at 09:07, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 8/2/2017 12:51 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
Venka they are visible as community projects on the website and our
promotion.

Jody Community projects and "projects in incubation" were different and are listed
as such on our present website. The decision to put them together (as a part of
re-branding) was neither informed to or approved by the board.

All project in incubation can display on their project leaflet and website they
they are striving to graduate as an OSGeo project and undergoing our
software vetting process.

Joining incubation reflects on the project team and their wishes, their commitment as a team to the OSGeo community. 

The branding associated with OSGeo Project reflects the result.  The branding associated with OSGeo community also reflects a result. 



Venka is there any reason for projects that are in our incubation process
to be considered for more visibility then our community projects?
Jody I never talked about more visibility or less. I said that Project in Incubation
must be shown as such with appropriate logo.

And I am asking you to consider why - what are you trying to communicate with an Incubation logo and to whom?

aside: "Incubation" logo, "Project in Incubation" would be too long,
 
Why? Because they are taking steps to graduate as OSGeo projects and because
that is how it was before changes were made without information or
approval from the board.

We can discuss the responsibilities of the incubation committee and of the board if you like.
 
Even the PSC of project under incubation were not informed about this.

Venka you are appealing to process - as such we can always do a better job communicating it is true:
a) I have started this email thread here with the board
b) I have started an email thread on the incubation list to communicate with project teams 

 



--
Jody Garnett

On 1 August 2017 at 08:49, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]
wrote:
....
On 8/2/2017 12:44 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:

Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
how it was approved.



The categorization has not changed, these projects are part of the
incubation process.

Then let us  continue to use the "OSGeo Incubation logo" and provide
visibility to our projects in incubation.



_______________________________________________
Board mailing [hidden email]://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board






_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

Helena Mitasova-7
In reply to this post by jody.garnett

On Aug 1, 2017, at 11:51 AM, Jody Garnett <[hidden email]> wrote:

Venka they are visible as community projects on the website and our promotion.

Venka is there any reason for projects that are in our incubation process to be considered for more visibility then our community projects?

Jody,

this is not about visibility - both categories are equaly visible, but they are different. The original intent was for the community projects to replace the confusing OSGeo labs - smaller projects that could potentially grow enough to become osgeo projects
but also projects which may never reach the osgeo projects status or can become integrated into a larger projects - there are many options. As Venka said, entering the incubation is a major decision and a commitment of a project 
so we need to make sure they are labeled as such. I believe that needs to be clear on the osgeo website that these are two different project categories. If things have changed I think that this is an issue at the core of OSGeo and needs to be properly recorded by vote from the board and the PSC of the projects in incubation need to be notified.

Helena

--
Jody Garnett

On 1 August 2017 at 08:49, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]> wrote:
....
On 8/2/2017 12:44 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
how it was approved.


The categorization has not changed, these projects are part of the
incubation process.
Then let us  continue to use the "OSGeo Incubation logo" and provide
visibility to our projects in incubation.


      

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board




Helena Mitasova
Professor at the Department of Marine, 
Earth, and Atmospheric Sciences
and Center for Geospatial Analytics
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC 27695-8208
"All electronic mail messages in connection with State business which are sent to or received by this account are subject to the NC Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.” 


_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

jody.garnett
I will think about it, and wait to hear back from the incubation team.

I have had a couple private messages encouraging compromise; in this case I am not quite sure. I wish I was better at communicating why.

--
Jody Garnett

On 1 August 2017 at 10:05, Helena Mitasova <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Aug 1, 2017, at 11:51 AM, Jody Garnett <[hidden email]> wrote:

Venka they are visible as community projects on the website and our promotion.

Venka is there any reason for projects that are in our incubation process to be considered for more visibility then our community projects?

Jody,

this is not about visibility - both categories are equaly visible, but they are different. The original intent was for the community projects to replace the confusing OSGeo labs - smaller projects that could potentially grow enough to become osgeo projects
but also projects which may never reach the osgeo projects status or can become integrated into a larger projects - there are many options. As Venka said, entering the incubation is a major decision and a commitment of a project 
so we need to make sure they are labeled as such. I believe that needs to be clear on the osgeo website that these are two different project categories. If things have changed I think that this is an issue at the core of OSGeo and needs to be properly recorded by vote from the board and the PSC of the projects in incubation need to be notified.

Helena

--
Jody Garnett

On 1 August 2017 at 08:49, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]> wrote:
....
On 8/2/2017 12:44 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
how it was approved.


The categorization has not changed, these projects are part of the
incubation process.
Then let us  continue to use the "OSGeo Incubation logo" and provide
visibility to our projects in incubation.


      

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board




Helena Mitasova
Professor at the Department of Marine, 
Earth, and Atmospheric Sciences
and Center for Geospatial Analytics
North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC 27695-8208
"All electronic mail messages in connection with State business which are sent to or received by this account are subject to the NC Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.” 



_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

Cameron Shorter
In reply to this post by jody.garnett

OSGeo Board,

Re: the level of advertising provided to projects in incubation.

I'm concerned that a board member has requested a concept about incubation be taken to the Board email list, rather than Board members with an opinion offering to join and help the incubation list.

I'm concerned for a number of reasons:

1. The OSGeo Incubation committee has had problems getting projects to move through incubation, which is significantly sucking up volunteer resources. This was/is a significant problem threatening the effectiveness of incubation. After much debate on the incubation list, it was resolved collectively and transparently that reducing the advertising value of "being in incubation" would provide encouragement for projects to keep moving through.

2. Board members are welcome to join OSGeo committees are contribute to conversations. The time to comment on incubation issues is when it is being debated at the committee level. Note, that opinions hold much greater weight if they are backed up by the commitment to implement the opinion. This is the principle of a Do-ocracy.

3. If the board wishes to enable their communities, they should trust the communities and back the community decisions. Over-riding decisions of a community at a higher level is a significant demotivator. It is a dis-empowerment of communities and will long term lead to the dis-engagement of communities.

4. The recent conversation thread on the board list has not offered a solution as to how to solve the incubation committee problem of projects not progressing to completion. Note, a suggestion along the lines of "someone else should do ..." doesn't count as a solution.

--

With regards to the level of advertising we give to "OSGeo Projects in Incubation", I agree with the Incubation committee's decision (as explained by Jody), that we should reduce the value provided by "being in incubation" which increases the value of "being incubated".

We should be helping new users find quality incubated projects. You can think of it as a quality star rating if you like. Advertising that a project is "in incubation" implies a level of quality that has not yet been earned.

Warm regards, Cameron


On 2/8/17 2:24 am, Jody Garnett wrote:
On 1 August 2017 at 09:07, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 8/2/2017 12:51 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
Venka they are visible as community projects on the website and our
promotion.

Jody Community projects and "projects in incubation" were different and are listed
as such on our present website. The decision to put them together (as a part of
re-branding) was neither informed to or approved by the board.

All project in incubation can display on their project leaflet and website they
they are striving to graduate as an OSGeo project and undergoing our
software vetting process.

Joining incubation reflects on the project team and their wishes, their commitment as a team to the OSGeo community. 

The branding associated with OSGeo Project reflects the result.  The branding associated with OSGeo community also reflects a result. 



Venka is there any reason for projects that are in our incubation process
to be considered for more visibility then our community projects?
Jody I never talked about more visibility or less. I said that Project in Incubation
must be shown as such with appropriate logo.

And I am asking you to consider why - what are you trying to communicate with an Incubation logo and to whom?

aside: "Incubation" logo, "Project in Incubation" would be too long,
 
Why? Because they are taking steps to graduate as OSGeo projects and because
that is how it was before changes were made without information or
approval from the board.

We can discuss the responsibilities of the incubation committee and of the board if you like.
 
Even the PSC of project under incubation were not informed about this.

Venka you are appealing to process - as such we can always do a better job communicating it is true:
a) I have started this email thread here with the board
b) I have started an email thread on the incubation list to communicate with project teams 

 



--
Jody Garnett

On 1 August 2017 at 08:49, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]
wrote:
....
On 8/2/2017 12:44 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:

Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
how it was approved.



The categorization has not changed, these projects are part of the
incubation process.

Then let us  continue to use the "OSGeo Incubation logo" and provide
visibility to our projects in incubation.



_______________________________________________
Board mailing [hidden email]://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board







_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board

-- 
Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

jody.garnett
Thanks Cameron, you are doing a better job of communicating this one then me.

Venkas observation is valid - that it is a surprise to PSC members (and board members) that a "Project in Incubation" badge is not available. As committee chair it is my responsible to communicate with the board, I tend to focus significant items - like the recent graduation.

For incubation you touch on an important idea - that the incubation process is there to help the project teams improve. Any advertising or visibility benefit is a distraction from this goal (and in some cases has proved harmful).

I also want to focus on the new OSGeo Community project category - it is an exciting idea that allows OSGeo to support and promote far more software projects. If we have project teams being disappointed about taking part as a community project it may serve to discourage involvement and outreach.

The conversation with Helena is also important - the commitment of the project teams should be acknowledged. One of our foundation goals, to increase participation, was to do a better job of celebrating participation. Having project teams being proud of their participation and commitment is a good thing - so if a badge can help acknowledge this fact then it may yet serve a purpose.

Finally we have mounting reports of projects not staying on target with respect osgeo project expectations. This is a responsibility that should be debated at the board level, leaving board members (myself included) a pressing matter to attend to - see meeting minuets for action items: https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Face_to_Face_Meeting_Paris_2017#3._OSGeo_project_status



--
Jody Garnett

On 1 August 2017 at 14:17, Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]> wrote:

OSGeo Board,

Re: the level of advertising provided to projects in incubation.

I'm concerned that a board member has requested a concept about incubation be taken to the Board email list, rather than Board members with an opinion offering to join and help the incubation list.

I'm concerned for a number of reasons:

1. The OSGeo Incubation committee has had problems getting projects to move through incubation, which is significantly sucking up volunteer resources. This was/is a significant problem threatening the effectiveness of incubation. After much debate on the incubation list, it was resolved collectively and transparently that reducing the advertising value of "being in incubation" would provide encouragement for projects to keep moving through.

2. Board members are welcome to join OSGeo committees are contribute to conversations. The time to comment on incubation issues is when it is being debated at the committee level. Note, that opinions hold much greater weight if they are backed up by the commitment to implement the opinion. This is the principle of a Do-ocracy.

3. If the board wishes to enable their communities, they should trust the communities and back the community decisions. Over-riding decisions of a community at a higher level is a significant demotivator. It is a dis-empowerment of communities and will long term lead to the dis-engagement of communities.

4. The recent conversation thread on the board list has not offered a solution as to how to solve the incubation committee problem of projects not progressing to completion. Note, a suggestion along the lines of "someone else should do ..." doesn't count as a solution.

--

With regards to the level of advertising we give to "OSGeo Projects in Incubation", I agree with the Incubation committee's decision (as explained by Jody), that we should reduce the value provided by "being in incubation" which increases the value of "being incubated".

We should be helping new users find quality incubated projects. You can think of it as a quality star rating if you like. Advertising that a project is "in incubation" implies a level of quality that has not yet been earned.

Warm regards, Cameron


On 2/8/17 2:24 am, Jody Garnett wrote:
On 1 August 2017 at 09:07, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 8/2/2017 12:51 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
Venka they are visible as community projects on the website and our
promotion.

Jody Community projects and "projects in incubation" were different and are listed
as such on our present website. The decision to put them together (as a part of
re-branding) was neither informed to or approved by the board.

All project in incubation can display on their project leaflet and website they
they are striving to graduate as an OSGeo project and undergoing our
software vetting process.

Joining incubation reflects on the project team and their wishes, their commitment as a team to the OSGeo community. 

The branding associated with OSGeo Project reflects the result.  The branding associated with OSGeo community also reflects a result. 



Venka is there any reason for projects that are in our incubation process
to be considered for more visibility then our community projects?
Jody I never talked about more visibility or less. I said that Project in Incubation
must be shown as such with appropriate logo.

And I am asking you to consider why - what are you trying to communicate with an Incubation logo and to whom?

aside: "Incubation" logo, "Project in Incubation" would be too long,
 
Why? Because they are taking steps to graduate as OSGeo projects and because
that is how it was before changes were made without information or
approval from the board.

We can discuss the responsibilities of the incubation committee and of the board if you like.
 
Even the PSC of project under incubation were not informed about this.

Venka you are appealing to process - as such we can always do a better job communicating it is true:
a) I have started this email thread here with the board
b) I have started an email thread on the incubation list to communicate with project teams 

 



--
Jody Garnett

On 1 August 2017 at 08:49, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]
wrote:
....
On 8/2/2017 12:44 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:

Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
how it was approved.



The categorization has not changed, these projects are part of the
incubation process.

Then let us  continue to use the "OSGeo Incubation logo" and provide
visibility to our projects in incubation.



_______________________________________________
Board mailing [hidden email]://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board







_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board

-- 
Cameron Shorter
M <a href="tel:+61%20419%20142%20254" value="+61419142254" target="_blank">+61 419 142 254


_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

Venkatesh Raghavan
I think, I have repeated my stand and clearly stated my views.

The only way I see out of the present situation is to rollback
and continue with the three category model including
"OSGeo Project", "OSGeo Project in Incubation" and
"OSGeo Community (Project)". This will be a entail
redesign of three logos at [1] to celebrate the great work
being done in under the above three categories.

Any change in project categorization would entail a vote
from the board and consultation with PSC (especially
for the projects presently under incubation).

I am loaded with work at the university and will be
slow in communication till next 2 weeks.

Wish you all a great time at FOSS4G-Boston.

Best

Venka

[1]
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Community_Projects#Comparison_with_Incubation

On 8/2/2017 8:46 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:

> Thanks Cameron, you are doing a better job of communicating this one then
> me.
>
> Venkas observation is valid - that it is a surprise to PSC members (and
> board members) that a "Project in Incubation" badge is not available. As
> committee chair it is my responsible to communicate with the board, I tend
> to focus significant items - like the recent graduation.
>
> For incubation you touch on an important idea - that the incubation process
> is there to help the project teams improve. Any advertising or visibility
> benefit is a distraction from this goal (and in some cases has proved
> harmful).
>
> I also want to focus on the new OSGeo Community project category - it is an
> exciting idea that allows OSGeo to support and promote far more software
> projects. If we have project teams being disappointed about taking part as
> a community project it may serve to discourage involvement and outreach.
>
> The conversation with Helena is also important - the commitment of the
> project teams should be acknowledged. One of our foundation goals, to
> increase participation, was to do a better job of celebrating
> participation. Having project teams being proud of their participation and
> commitment is a good thing - so if a badge can help acknowledge this fact
> then it may yet serve a purpose.
>
> Finally we have mounting reports of projects not staying on target with
> respect osgeo project expectations. This is a responsibility that should be
> debated at the board level, leaving board members (myself included) a
> pressing matter to attend to - see meeting minuets for action items:
> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Face_to_Face_Meeting_Paris_2017#3._OSGeo_project_status
>
>
>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
> On 1 August 2017 at 14:17, Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> OSGeo Board,
>>
>> Re: the level of advertising provided to projects in incubation.
>>
>> I'm concerned that a board member has requested a concept about incubation
>> be taken to the Board email list, rather than Board members with an opinion
>> offering to join and help the incubation list.
>>
>> I'm concerned for a number of reasons:
>>
>> 1. The OSGeo Incubation committee has had problems getting projects to
>> move through incubation, which is significantly sucking up volunteer
>> resources. This was/is a significant problem threatening the effectiveness
>> of incubation. After much debate on the incubation list, it was resolved
>> collectively and transparently that reducing the advertising value of
>> "being in incubation" would provide encouragement for projects to keep
>> moving through.
>>
>> 2. Board members are welcome to join OSGeo committees are contribute to
>> conversations. The time to comment on incubation issues is when it is being
>> debated at the committee level. Note, that opinions hold much greater
>> weight if they are backed up by the commitment to implement the opinion.
>> This is the principle of a Do-ocracy.
>>
>> 3. If the board wishes to enable their communities, they should trust the
>> communities and back the community decisions. Over-riding decisions of a
>> community at a higher level is a significant demotivator. It is a
>> dis-empowerment of communities and will long term lead to the
>> dis-engagement of communities.
>>
>> 4. The recent conversation thread on the board list has not offered a
>> solution as to how to solve the incubation committee problem of projects
>> not progressing to completion. Note, a suggestion along the lines of
>> "someone else should do ..." doesn't count as a solution.
>>
>> --
>>
>> With regards to the level of advertising we give to "OSGeo Projects in
>> Incubation", I agree with the Incubation committee's decision (as explained
>> by Jody), that we should reduce the value provided by "being in incubation"
>> which increases the value of "being incubated".
>>
>> We should be helping new users find quality incubated projects. You can
>> think of it as a quality star rating if you like. Advertising that a
>> project is "in incubation" implies a level of quality that has not yet been
>> earned.
>>
>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>
>> On 2/8/17 2:24 am, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>
>> On 1 August 2017 at 09:07, Venkatesh Raghavan <
>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/2/2017 12:51 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>>
>>>> Venka they are visible as community projects on the website and our
>>>> promotion.
>>>>
>>> Jody Community projects and "projects in incubation" were different and
>>> are listed
>>> as such on our present website. The decision to put them together (as a
>>> part of
>>> re-branding) was neither informed to or approved by the board.
>>>
>>> All project in incubation can display on their project leaflet and
>>> website they
>>> they are striving to graduate as an OSGeo project and undergoing our
>>> software vetting process.
>>
>> Joining incubation reflects on the project team and their wishes, their
>> commitment as a team to the OSGeo community.
>>
>> The branding associated with OSGeo Project reflects the result.  The
>> branding associated with OSGeo community also reflects a result.
>>
>>
>>
>> Venka is there any reason for projects that are in our incubation process
>>>> to be considered for more visibility then our community projects?
>>>>
>>> Jody I never talked about more visibility or less. I said that Project in
>>> Incubation
>>> must be shown as such with appropriate logo.
>>>
>> And I am asking you to consider why - what are you trying to communicate
>> with an Incubation logo and to whom?
>>
>> aside: "Incubation" logo, "Project in Incubation" would be too long,
>>
>>
>>> Why? Because they are taking steps to graduate as OSGeo projects and
>>> because
>>> that is how it was before changes were made without information or
>>> approval from the board.
>>
>> We can discuss the responsibilities of the incubation committee and of the
>> board if you like.
>>
>>
>>> Even the PSC of project under incubation were not informed about this.
>>
>> Venka you are appealing to process - as such we can always do a better job
>> communicating it is true:
>> a) I have started this email thread here with the board
>> b) I have started an email thread on the incubation list to communicate
>> with project teams
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jody Garnett
>>>>
>>>> On 1 August 2017 at 08:49, Venkatesh Raghavan <
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> ....
>>>>> On 8/2/2017 12:44 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
>>>>> of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
>>>>> how it was approved.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The categorization has not changed, these projects are part of the
>>>>> incubation process.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then let us  continue to use the "OSGeo Incubation logo" and provide
>>>>> visibility to our projects in incubation.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Board mailing [hidden email]://
>>>>> lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing [hidden email]://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cameron Shorter
>> M +61 419 142 254 <+61%20419%20142%20254>
>>
>>

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

jody.garnett
I think I have also (with a bit of help) clearly state my view.

Venka with due respect I will be guided by feedback form the incubation list and the projects in incubation on this.

Thank you for this discussion.

--
Jody Garnett

On 2 August 2017 at 06:43, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]> wrote:
I think, I have repeated my stand and clearly stated my views.

The only way I see out of the present situation is to rollback
and continue with the three category model including
"OSGeo Project", "OSGeo Project in Incubation" and
"OSGeo Community (Project)". This will be a entail
redesign of three logos at [1] to celebrate the great work
being done in under the above three categories.

Any change in project categorization would entail a vote
from the board and consultation with PSC (especially
for the projects presently under incubation).

I am loaded with work at the university and will be
slow in communication till next 2 weeks.

Wish you all a great time at FOSS4G-Boston.

Best

Venka

[1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Community_Projects#Comparison_with_Incubation


On 8/2/2017 8:46 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
Thanks Cameron, you are doing a better job of communicating this one then
me.

Venkas observation is valid - that it is a surprise to PSC members (and
board members) that a "Project in Incubation" badge is not available. As
committee chair it is my responsible to communicate with the board, I tend
to focus significant items - like the recent graduation.

For incubation you touch on an important idea - that the incubation process
is there to help the project teams improve. Any advertising or visibility
benefit is a distraction from this goal (and in some cases has proved
harmful).

I also want to focus on the new OSGeo Community project category - it is an
exciting idea that allows OSGeo to support and promote far more software
projects. If we have project teams being disappointed about taking part as
a community project it may serve to discourage involvement and outreach.

The conversation with Helena is also important - the commitment of the
project teams should be acknowledged. One of our foundation goals, to
increase participation, was to do a better job of celebrating
participation. Having project teams being proud of their participation and
commitment is a good thing - so if a badge can help acknowledge this fact
then it may yet serve a purpose.

Finally we have mounting reports of projects not staying on target with
respect osgeo project expectations. This is a responsibility that should be
debated at the board level, leaving board members (myself included) a
pressing matter to attend to - see meeting minuets for action items:
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Face_to_Face_Meeting_Paris_2017#3._OSGeo_project_status



--
Jody Garnett

On 1 August 2017 at 14:17, Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]>
wrote:

OSGeo Board,

Re: the level of advertising provided to projects in incubation.

I'm concerned that a board member has requested a concept about incubation
be taken to the Board email list, rather than Board members with an opinion
offering to join and help the incubation list.

I'm concerned for a number of reasons:

1. The OSGeo Incubation committee has had problems getting projects to
move through incubation, which is significantly sucking up volunteer
resources. This was/is a significant problem threatening the effectiveness
of incubation. After much debate on the incubation list, it was resolved
collectively and transparently that reducing the advertising value of
"being in incubation" would provide encouragement for projects to keep
moving through.

2. Board members are welcome to join OSGeo committees are contribute to
conversations. The time to comment on incubation issues is when it is being
debated at the committee level. Note, that opinions hold much greater
weight if they are backed up by the commitment to implement the opinion.
This is the principle of a Do-ocracy.

3. If the board wishes to enable their communities, they should trust the
communities and back the community decisions. Over-riding decisions of a
community at a higher level is a significant demotivator. It is a
dis-empowerment of communities and will long term lead to the
dis-engagement of communities.

4. The recent conversation thread on the board list has not offered a
solution as to how to solve the incubation committee problem of projects
not progressing to completion. Note, a suggestion along the lines of
"someone else should do ..." doesn't count as a solution.

--

With regards to the level of advertising we give to "OSGeo Projects in
Incubation", I agree with the Incubation committee's decision (as explained
by Jody), that we should reduce the value provided by "being in incubation"
which increases the value of "being incubated".

We should be helping new users find quality incubated projects. You can
think of it as a quality star rating if you like. Advertising that a
project is "in incubation" implies a level of quality that has not yet been
earned.

Warm regards, Cameron

On 2/8/17 2:24 am, Jody Garnett wrote:

On 1 August 2017 at 09:07, Venkatesh Raghavan <
[hidden email]> wrote:

On 8/2/2017 12:51 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:

Venka they are visible as community projects on the website and our
promotion.

Jody Community projects and "projects in incubation" were different and
are listed
as such on our present website. The decision to put them together (as a
part of
re-branding) was neither informed to or approved by the board.

All project in incubation can display on their project leaflet and
website they
they are striving to graduate as an OSGeo project and undergoing our
software vetting process.

Joining incubation reflects on the project team and their wishes, their
commitment as a team to the OSGeo community.

The branding associated with OSGeo Project reflects the result.  The
branding associated with OSGeo community also reflects a result.



Venka is there any reason for projects that are in our incubation process
to be considered for more visibility then our community projects?

Jody I never talked about more visibility or less. I said that Project in
Incubation
must be shown as such with appropriate logo.

And I am asking you to consider why - what are you trying to communicate
with an Incubation logo and to whom?

aside: "Incubation" logo, "Project in Incubation" would be too long,


Why? Because they are taking steps to graduate as OSGeo projects and
because
that is how it was before changes were made without information or
approval from the board.

We can discuss the responsibilities of the incubation committee and of the
board if you like.


Even the PSC of project under incubation were not informed about this.

Venka you are appealing to process - as such we can always do a better job
communicating it is true:
a) I have started this email thread here with the board
b) I have started an email thread on the incubation list to communicate
with project teams





--
Jody Garnett

On 1 August 2017 at 08:49, Venkatesh Raghavan <
[hidden email]

wrote:
....
On 8/2/2017 12:44 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:

Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
how it was approved.



The categorization has not changed, these projects are part of the
incubation process.

Then let us  continue to use the "OSGeo Incubation logo" and provide
visibility to our projects in incubation.



_______________________________________________
Board mailing [hidden email]://
lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board





_______________________________________________
Board mailing [hidden email]://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board


--
Cameron Shorter
M <a href="tel:%2B61%20419%20142%20254" value="+61419142254" target="_blank">+61 419 142 254 <+61%20419%20142%20254>



_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board


_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

Marc Vloemans-3
All,

From a communications point of view:
- OSGeo is far better off celebrating and promoting successes
- if 'projects in incubation' have gained more traction by/value from that previous badge, I am interested in learning so
- if no value has been derived, it is time to try something new...even success is not guaranteed


Kind regards,
Marc Vloemans


Op 2 aug. 2017 om 18:46 heeft Jody Garnett <[hidden email]> het volgende geschreven:

I think I have also (with a bit of help) clearly state my view.

Venka with due respect I will be guided by feedback form the incubation list and the projects in incubation on this.

Thank you for this discussion.

--
Jody Garnett

On 2 August 2017 at 06:43, Venkatesh Raghavan <[hidden email]> wrote:
I think, I have repeated my stand and clearly stated my views.

The only way I see out of the present situation is to rollback
and continue with the three category model including
"OSGeo Project", "OSGeo Project in Incubation" and
"OSGeo Community (Project)". This will be a entail
redesign of three logos at [1] to celebrate the great work
being done in under the above three categories.

Any change in project categorization would entail a vote
from the board and consultation with PSC (especially
for the projects presently under incubation).

I am loaded with work at the university and will be
slow in communication till next 2 weeks.

Wish you all a great time at FOSS4G-Boston.

Best

Venka

[1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Community_Projects#Comparison_with_Incubation


On 8/2/2017 8:46 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
Thanks Cameron, you are doing a better job of communicating this one then
me.

Venkas observation is valid - that it is a surprise to PSC members (and
board members) that a "Project in Incubation" badge is not available. As
committee chair it is my responsible to communicate with the board, I tend
to focus significant items - like the recent graduation.

For incubation you touch on an important idea - that the incubation process
is there to help the project teams improve. Any advertising or visibility
benefit is a distraction from this goal (and in some cases has proved
harmful).

I also want to focus on the new OSGeo Community project category - it is an
exciting idea that allows OSGeo to support and promote far more software
projects. If we have project teams being disappointed about taking part as
a community project it may serve to discourage involvement and outreach.

The conversation with Helena is also important - the commitment of the
project teams should be acknowledged. One of our foundation goals, to
increase participation, was to do a better job of celebrating
participation. Having project teams being proud of their participation and
commitment is a good thing - so if a badge can help acknowledge this fact
then it may yet serve a purpose.

Finally we have mounting reports of projects not staying on target with
respect osgeo project expectations. This is a responsibility that should be
debated at the board level, leaving board members (myself included) a
pressing matter to attend to - see meeting minuets for action items:
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Face_to_Face_Meeting_Paris_2017#3._OSGeo_project_status



--
Jody Garnett

On 1 August 2017 at 14:17, Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]>
wrote:

OSGeo Board,

Re: the level of advertising provided to projects in incubation.

I'm concerned that a board member has requested a concept about incubation
be taken to the Board email list, rather than Board members with an opinion
offering to join and help the incubation list.

I'm concerned for a number of reasons:

1. The OSGeo Incubation committee has had problems getting projects to
move through incubation, which is significantly sucking up volunteer
resources. This was/is a significant problem threatening the effectiveness
of incubation. After much debate on the incubation list, it was resolved
collectively and transparently that reducing the advertising value of
"being in incubation" would provide encouragement for projects to keep
moving through.

2. Board members are welcome to join OSGeo committees are contribute to
conversations. The time to comment on incubation issues is when it is being
debated at the committee level. Note, that opinions hold much greater
weight if they are backed up by the commitment to implement the opinion.
This is the principle of a Do-ocracy.

3. If the board wishes to enable their communities, they should trust the
communities and back the community decisions. Over-riding decisions of a
community at a higher level is a significant demotivator. It is a
dis-empowerment of communities and will long term lead to the
dis-engagement of communities.

4. The recent conversation thread on the board list has not offered a
solution as to how to solve the incubation committee problem of projects
not progressing to completion. Note, a suggestion along the lines of
"someone else should do ..." doesn't count as a solution.

--

With regards to the level of advertising we give to "OSGeo Projects in
Incubation", I agree with the Incubation committee's decision (as explained
by Jody), that we should reduce the value provided by "being in incubation"
which increases the value of "being incubated".

We should be helping new users find quality incubated projects. You can
think of it as a quality star rating if you like. Advertising that a
project is "in incubation" implies a level of quality that has not yet been
earned.

Warm regards, Cameron

On 2/8/17 2:24 am, Jody Garnett wrote:

On 1 August 2017 at 09:07, Venkatesh Raghavan <
[hidden email]> wrote:

On 8/2/2017 12:51 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:

Venka they are visible as community projects on the website and our
promotion.

Jody Community projects and "projects in incubation" were different and
are listed
as such on our present website. The decision to put them together (as a
part of
re-branding) was neither informed to or approved by the board.

All project in incubation can display on their project leaflet and
website they
they are striving to graduate as an OSGeo project and undergoing our
software vetting process.

Joining incubation reflects on the project team and their wishes, their
commitment as a team to the OSGeo community.

The branding associated with OSGeo Project reflects the result.  The
branding associated with OSGeo community also reflects a result.



Venka is there any reason for projects that are in our incubation process
to be considered for more visibility then our community projects?

Jody I never talked about more visibility or less. I said that Project in
Incubation
must be shown as such with appropriate logo.

And I am asking you to consider why - what are you trying to communicate
with an Incubation logo and to whom?

aside: "Incubation" logo, "Project in Incubation" would be too long,


Why? Because they are taking steps to graduate as OSGeo projects and
because
that is how it was before changes were made without information or
approval from the board.

We can discuss the responsibilities of the incubation committee and of the
board if you like.


Even the PSC of project under incubation were not informed about this.

Venka you are appealing to process - as such we can always do a better job
communicating it is true:
a) I have started this email thread here with the board
b) I have started an email thread on the incubation list to communicate
with project teams





--
Jody Garnett

On 1 August 2017 at 08:49, Venkatesh Raghavan <
[hidden email]

wrote:
....
On 8/2/2017 12:44 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:

Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
how it was approved.



The categorization has not changed, these projects are part of the
incubation process.

Then let us  continue to use the "OSGeo Incubation logo" and provide
visibility to our projects in incubation.



_______________________________________________
Board mailing [hidden email]://
lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board





_______________________________________________
Board mailing [hidden email]://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board


--
Cameron Shorter
M <a href="tel:%2B61%20419%20142%20254" value="+61419142254" target="_blank">+61 419 142 254 <+61%20419%20142%20254>



_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: discussion on osgeo projects, osgeo community and incubation

Cameron Shorter
In reply to this post by Venkatesh Raghavan
Hi Venka,

I hear that you feel strongly about a matter. Your passion is noted and
valuable. Others have spoken with equal conviction to the contrary. The
other (standard) way to resolve a disagreement is to initiate a vote.

Insisting on a course of action without a vote sounds quite
authoritarian, and contrary to the principles of open source and democracy.

If you wish to change something, I suggest initiating a vote. If related
to incubation, or to marketing, I suggest those communities should be
involved in the voting process.

Warm regards, Cameron

On 2/8/17 11:43 pm, Venkatesh Raghavan wrote:

> I think, I have repeated my stand and clearly stated my views.
>
> The only way I see out of the present situation is to rollback
> and continue with the three category model including
> "OSGeo Project", "OSGeo Project in Incubation" and
> "OSGeo Community (Project)". This will be a entail
> redesign of three logos at [1] to celebrate the great work
> being done in under the above three categories.
>
> Any change in project categorization would entail a vote
> from the board and consultation with PSC (especially
> for the projects presently under incubation).
>
> I am loaded with work at the university and will be
> slow in communication till next 2 weeks.
>
> Wish you all a great time at FOSS4G-Boston.
>
> Best
>
> Venka
>
> [1]
> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Community_Projects#Comparison_with_Incubation
>
> On 8/2/2017 8:46 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>> Thanks Cameron, you are doing a better job of communicating this one
>> then
>> me.
>>
>> Venkas observation is valid - that it is a surprise to PSC members (and
>> board members) that a "Project in Incubation" badge is not available. As
>> committee chair it is my responsible to communicate with the board, I
>> tend
>> to focus significant items - like the recent graduation.
>>
>> For incubation you touch on an important idea - that the incubation
>> process
>> is there to help the project teams improve. Any advertising or
>> visibility
>> benefit is a distraction from this goal (and in some cases has proved
>> harmful).
>>
>> I also want to focus on the new OSGeo Community project category - it
>> is an
>> exciting idea that allows OSGeo to support and promote far more software
>> projects. If we have project teams being disappointed about taking
>> part as
>> a community project it may serve to discourage involvement and outreach.
>>
>> The conversation with Helena is also important - the commitment of the
>> project teams should be acknowledged. One of our foundation goals, to
>> increase participation, was to do a better job of celebrating
>> participation. Having project teams being proud of their
>> participation and
>> commitment is a good thing - so if a badge can help acknowledge this
>> fact
>> then it may yet serve a purpose.
>>
>> Finally we have mounting reports of projects not staying on target with
>> respect osgeo project expectations. This is a responsibility that
>> should be
>> debated at the board level, leaving board members (myself included) a
>> pressing matter to attend to - see meeting minuets for action items:
>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Face_to_Face_Meeting_Paris_2017#3._OSGeo_project_status 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 1 August 2017 at 14:17, Cameron Shorter <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> OSGeo Board,
>>>
>>> Re: the level of advertising provided to projects in incubation.
>>>
>>> I'm concerned that a board member has requested a concept about
>>> incubation
>>> be taken to the Board email list, rather than Board members with an
>>> opinion
>>> offering to join and help the incubation list.
>>>
>>> I'm concerned for a number of reasons:
>>>
>>> 1. The OSGeo Incubation committee has had problems getting projects to
>>> move through incubation, which is significantly sucking up volunteer
>>> resources. This was/is a significant problem threatening the
>>> effectiveness
>>> of incubation. After much debate on the incubation list, it was
>>> resolved
>>> collectively and transparently that reducing the advertising value of
>>> "being in incubation" would provide encouragement for projects to keep
>>> moving through.
>>>
>>> 2. Board members are welcome to join OSGeo committees are contribute to
>>> conversations. The time to comment on incubation issues is when it
>>> is being
>>> debated at the committee level. Note, that opinions hold much greater
>>> weight if they are backed up by the commitment to implement the
>>> opinion.
>>> This is the principle of a Do-ocracy.
>>>
>>> 3. If the board wishes to enable their communities, they should
>>> trust the
>>> communities and back the community decisions. Over-riding decisions
>>> of a
>>> community at a higher level is a significant demotivator. It is a
>>> dis-empowerment of communities and will long term lead to the
>>> dis-engagement of communities.
>>>
>>> 4. The recent conversation thread on the board list has not offered a
>>> solution as to how to solve the incubation committee problem of
>>> projects
>>> not progressing to completion. Note, a suggestion along the lines of
>>> "someone else should do ..." doesn't count as a solution.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> With regards to the level of advertising we give to "OSGeo Projects in
>>> Incubation", I agree with the Incubation committee's decision (as
>>> explained
>>> by Jody), that we should reduce the value provided by "being in
>>> incubation"
>>> which increases the value of "being incubated".
>>>
>>> We should be helping new users find quality incubated projects. You can
>>> think of it as a quality star rating if you like. Advertising that a
>>> project is "in incubation" implies a level of quality that has not
>>> yet been
>>> earned.
>>>
>>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>>
>>> On 2/8/17 2:24 am, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>>
>>> On 1 August 2017 at 09:07, Venkatesh Raghavan <
>>> [hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/2/2017 12:51 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Venka they are visible as community projects on the website and our
>>>>> promotion.
>>>>>
>>>> Jody Community projects and "projects in incubation" were different
>>>> and
>>>> are listed
>>>> as such on our present website. The decision to put them together
>>>> (as a
>>>> part of
>>>> re-branding) was neither informed to or approved by the board.
>>>>
>>>> All project in incubation can display on their project leaflet and
>>>> website they
>>>> they are striving to graduate as an OSGeo project and undergoing our
>>>> software vetting process.
>>>
>>> Joining incubation reflects on the project team and their wishes, their
>>> commitment as a team to the OSGeo community.
>>>
>>> The branding associated with OSGeo Project reflects the result.  The
>>> branding associated with OSGeo community also reflects a result.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Venka is there any reason for projects that are in our incubation
>>> process
>>>>> to be considered for more visibility then our community projects?
>>>>>
>>>> Jody I never talked about more visibility or less. I said that
>>>> Project in
>>>> Incubation
>>>> must be shown as such with appropriate logo.
>>>>
>>> And I am asking you to consider why - what are you trying to
>>> communicate
>>> with an Incubation logo and to whom?
>>>
>>> aside: "Incubation" logo, "Project in Incubation" would be too long,
>>>
>>>
>>>> Why? Because they are taking steps to graduate as OSGeo projects and
>>>> because
>>>> that is how it was before changes were made without information or
>>>> approval from the board.
>>>
>>> We can discuss the responsibilities of the incubation committee and
>>> of the
>>> board if you like.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Even the PSC of project under incubation were not informed about this.
>>>
>>> Venka you are appealing to process - as such we can always do a
>>> better job
>>> communicating it is true:
>>> a) I have started this email thread here with the board
>>> b) I have started an email thread on the incubation list to communicate
>>> with project teams
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jody Garnett
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1 August 2017 at 08:49, Venkatesh Raghavan <
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> ....
>>>>>> On 8/2/2017 12:44 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any change from previous categorization would require the approval
>>>>>> of the board. I do not recall when such a change was decided and
>>>>>> how it was approved.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The categorization has not changed, these projects are part of the
>>>>>> incubation process.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then let us  continue to use the "OSGeo Incubation logo" and provide
>>>>>> visibility to our projects in incubation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Board mailing [hidden email]://
>>>>>> lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Board mailing
>>> [hidden email]://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Cameron Shorter
>>> M +61 419 142 254 <+61%20419%20142%20254>
>>>
>>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board

--
Cameron Shorter
M +61 419 142 254

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
12