A PSC is not required for any OSGeo project (even a graduated project)
- being inclusive is. The GeoNode project is an example in incubation
that forms a leadership team based on recent committers as I
understand it. The benevolent dictator model does not meet this
inclusive requirement, Cameron suggested a steering committee formed
with one chair member with 1.5 votes (to prevent deadlock).
The OSGeo incubation principles are often based on risk ... to users
of the software project. The "benevolent dictator" model, just like
having a project backed by a single company/organization, suffers from
a stability problem - what if the dictator or organization loses
interest? By splitting responsibility across multiple parties the
project has a much better chance of weathering these storms ... and
the risk for users of the software is lower.
I am sorry I am not the best at talking through the pros/cons of the
benevolent dictator model - perhaps some who feels more passionately
about this subject (or who has first hand experience) could step in.
--
Jody Garnett
On 1 May 2016 at 12:50, Rashad Kanavath <mohammedrasha...@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 1:29 PM, Jody Garnett
<jody.garn...@gmail.com> wrote:
This is kind of a larger topic than just the incubation committee,
but no I do not believe we should. It is a defining characteristic
of our foundation to not place many restrictions on our projects -
but demand that the projects be inclusive and open to
collaboration.
I do not believe that the "benevolent dictator" fits this ideal.
I also do not think we need to stress the PSC approach as the one
true way, smaller projects that only wish to have committers vote
on decisions (rather than form a PSC) is perfectly acceptable -
provided there is a provision for new committers to be added into
the mix.
I agree with Jody that demanding a PSC for projects to be in
incubation is not a good idea.
If a PSC is required to join OSGeo. It must propose how a right PSC
should work. Otherwise any project can form a PSC on whatever
criteria, one being the "dictator" way.
Project can decide weather to have PSC or not. If they have it must
be validated by OSGeo during incubation process. I hope having a
checklist to validate working PSC and how it should work can filter
projects with "benevolent dictator".
We also have an outstanding request from our president to make the
foundation more inclusive. With this in mind we are a lot less
demanding on our community projects - which provides a way for
projects that do not meet some of our ideal criteria to be part of
the foundation.
--
Jody
--
Jody Garnett
On 1 May 2016 at 00:44, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shor...@gmail.com>
wrote:
OSGeo discuss, OSGeo incubation, OSGeo board,
I'm hoping the greater OSGeo community will consider and comment on
this question:
Should OSGeo accept a "benevolent dictator" [1] governance model for
incubating projects?
-0 from me, Cameron Shorter.
Background:
* As part of incubation, Peter Baumann, from Rasdaman has requested
a "benevolent dictatorship" governance model [2]. While "benevolent
dictatorships" often lead to successful projects, all prior OSGeo
incubated projects have selected "equal vote by PSC members".
Someone with better legal training than me might find "benevolent
dictatorships" to be unconstitutional according to OSGeo bylaws. [3]
[1] Eric Raymond's "Homesteading the Noosphere":
http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/homesteading/homesteading/ar01s16.html
[2] http://www.rasdaman.org/wiki/Governance
[3]
http://www.osgeo.org/content/foundation/incorporation/bylaws.html
On 1/05/2016 3:56 pm, Peter Baumann wrote:
Cameron-
I understand where you are coming from, and your characterization is
definitely correct. While our process is and always has been
absolutely open to discussion so as to obtain the scientifically and
technically best solution this "benevolent dictatorship" has brought
rasdaman to where it stands now - it is designed by innovation, not
by committee. Just to get me right, our model is certainly not the
right one for every endeavour. Here it is the most appropriate, and
hence we will keep it.
As you observe, this model is not contradicting OS as such, and many
projects run it. So ultimately it lies in the hand of OSGeo to
decide whether they accept the existing plurality of approaches (in
this case manifest with rasdaman).
best,
Peter
On 04/30/2016 10:47 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
Bruce, Peter,
I've read through the incubation process documentation, and can only
see one thing which I think breaks our OSGeo principles.
The Governance model includes a statement:
"In all issues, the PSC strives to achieve unanimous consent based
on a free, independent exchange of facts and opinions. Should such
consent exceptionally not be reached then Peter Baumann has a
casting vote."
http://www.rasdaman.org/wiki/Governance
This is describing a "benevolent dictator" model, which has proved
to be an effective model for many open source projects. See Eric
Raymond's "Homesteading the Noosphere":
[1]http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/homesteading/homesteading/ar01s16.html
However, it is not in line with existing OSGeo Incubated projects,
which have documented a "vote by PSC" as the defining governance
process. In practice, the PSC community debate alternatives, and if
needed, respectfully revert to reasoned advice provided by the
"benevolent dictator".
Peter, are you open to changing the governance model to a "vote by
PSC"?
I'd be comfortable with a "vote by PSC, with PSC chair being given
1.5 votes to break any deadlocks. I'd also be ok with PSC chair
defaulting to Peter (as founder), until such time as Peter resigns
from the role."
Warm regards, Cameron
--
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
LISAsoft
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
P +61 2 9009 5000 [2], W www.lisasoft.com [3], F +61 2 9009 5099 [4]
_______________________________________________
Incubator mailing list
incuba...@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
--
Regards,
Rashad
Links:
------
[1]
http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/homesteading/homesteading/ar01s16.html
[2] tel:%2B61%202%209009%205000
[3] http://www.lisasoft.com
[4] tel:%2B61%202%209009%205099
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
