Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] 5 Star OSGeo project maturity rating
I agree. At this stage, the ranking could do more harm than good, both for developers and for users: can you imagine the consequences of giving diff rating to mapserver,geoserver and deegree? Or to grass, gvsig and qgis? All the best. --- Paolo Cavallini http://www.faunalia.it/pc - Reply message - Da: "Daniel Morissette" Data: lun, giu 7, 2010 02:15 Oggetto: [OSGeo-Discuss] 5 Star OSGeo project maturity rating A: "OSGeo Discussions" I'm also not too keen on a star ranking system, especially if it is mostly based on having passed incubation or not. To me, passing incubation is more an indication of good process management and long term viability than an indication of software quality/robustness and ability to really solve the user's needs. However, a star ranking system makes me think of hotel/restaurant rating and would mislead the user to think that a software with 4 stars (because it passed incubation) does a better job than others with 2 or 3 which is not necessarily the case. If the goal is to denote whether a project has passed incubation or not then let's call the rating that way (which is what we currently do when we differentiate between graduated and in-incubation projects on www.osgeo.org). If we want to create a "project maturity rating" then it will have to take into account several variables as Andrea wrote earlier... and then defining those variables and evaluating each piece of software against them will be quite a task. In the end, I just wanted to register the fact that I too am worried about the possible side-effects of a poorly handled rating system on our communities. Daniel Cameron Shorter wrote: > On 06/06/10 10:14, Jason Birch wrote: >> IMHO getting into rating projects is just asking for trouble, >> infighting, bitterness, and people/projects walking away from OSGeo. >> > > Jason, this is a valid concern with decent founding. However I think the > potential for conflict is not as bad as you may think, and there is a > very strong user community desire for, and value to be gained from such > ratings. > > 1. We already have a rating system, based upon: > * Project has completed incubation > * Project is in incubation > * Project is not in incubation > What I'm suggesting is that we apply a star system to these stages. > > 2. We already have a criteria for defining this rating, (which may be > refined), which reduces the subjectiveness and hence the potential for > conflict. > -- Daniel Morissette http://www.mapgears.com/ ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Comment on OSGeo Project Marketing template before we set it in stone
The ODF adoption/marketing committee of OASIS would be ever so annoyed about your referencing ODF as the OpenOffice.org format as the whole point is that OpenDocument is not a memory dump of an application converted to some vague approximation of XML, but a genuine open standard which OpenOffice.org have made its default file format. Among the supporting evidence is that is the default format of KOffice as well as of OpenOffice and its derivatives. Oh and its being a published standard and legal status... - Original Message - > You are going to have to ask Tyler for more detail. For my part I have > seen them handed out; raised a couple issues with respect to Font use, > made an open office template for slides and workbooks myself for > foss4g and that is all I know. -- Files attached to this email may be in ISO 26300 format (OASIS Open Document Format). If you have difficulty opening them, please visit http://iso26300.info for more information. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] 5 Star OSGeo project maturity rating
Jason, I agree that it is important that any rating system has had a lot of thought put behind it, which is why I've suggested using the existing OSGeo graduation rating system - which has had input from many of us in the OSGeo community. I do think that Andrea has highlighted a couple of additional points which should be rolled into the OSGeo incubation criteria - but until that happens, we should use what we have, which is guidelines for projects going into incubation (assigned 3 stars), and criteria for projects completing graduation (assigned 4 stars). Bruce Bannerman wrote: Jason / Cameron, >From the potential utiliser / implementer viewpoint: I’d like to think that any project that has graduated OSGeo Incubation could be considered a quality project with all of the vectors described by Andrea. This proposed rating system implies that this may not be the case. Comments? Bruce Daniel Morissette wrote: I'm also not too keen on a star ranking system, especially if it is mostly based on having passed incubation or not. To me, passing incubation is more an indication of good process management and long term viability than an indication of software quality/robustness and ability to really solve the user's needs. However, a star ranking system makes me think of hotel/restaurant rating and would mislead the user to think that a software with 4 stars (because it passed incubation) does a better job than others with 2 or 3 which is not necessarily the case. If the goal is to denote whether a project has passed incubation or not then let's call the rating that way (which is what we currently do when we differentiate between graduated and in-incubation projects on www.osgeo.org). If we want to create a "project maturity rating" then it will have to take into account several variables as Andrea wrote earlier... and then defining those variables and evaluating each piece of software against them will be quite a task. In the end, I just wanted to register the fact that I too am worried about the possible side-effects of a poorly handled rating system on our communities. Daniel Cameron Shorter wrote: On 06/06/10 10:14, Jason Birch wrote: IMHO getting into rating projects is just asking for trouble, infighting, bitterness, and people/projects walking away from OSGeo. Jason, this is a valid concern with decent founding. However I think the potential for conflict is not as bad as you may think, and there is a very strong user community desire for, and value to be gained from such ratings. 1. We already have a rating system, based upon: * Project has completed incubation * Project is in incubation * Project is not in incubation What I'm suggesting is that we apply a star system to these stages. 2. We already have a criteria for defining this rating, (which may be refined), which reduces the subjectiveness and hence the potential for conflict. -- Cameron Shorter Geospatial Solutions Manager Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050 Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254 Think Globally, Fix Locally Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source http://www.lisasoft.com ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] 5 Star OSGeo project maturity rating
I'm also not too keen on a star ranking system, especially if it is mostly based on having passed incubation or not. To me, passing incubation is more an indication of good process management and long term viability than an indication of software quality/robustness and ability to really solve the user's needs. However, a star ranking system makes me think of hotel/restaurant rating and would mislead the user to think that a software with 4 stars (because it passed incubation) does a better job than others with 2 or 3 which is not necessarily the case. If the goal is to denote whether a project has passed incubation or not then let's call the rating that way (which is what we currently do when we differentiate between graduated and in-incubation projects on www.osgeo.org). If we want to create a "project maturity rating" then it will have to take into account several variables as Andrea wrote earlier... and then defining those variables and evaluating each piece of software against them will be quite a task. In the end, I just wanted to register the fact that I too am worried about the possible side-effects of a poorly handled rating system on our communities. Daniel Cameron Shorter wrote: On 06/06/10 10:14, Jason Birch wrote: IMHO getting into rating projects is just asking for trouble, infighting, bitterness, and people/projects walking away from OSGeo. Jason, this is a valid concern with decent founding. However I think the potential for conflict is not as bad as you may think, and there is a very strong user community desire for, and value to be gained from such ratings. 1. We already have a rating system, based upon: * Project has completed incubation * Project is in incubation * Project is not in incubation What I'm suggesting is that we apply a star system to these stages. 2. We already have a criteria for defining this rating, (which may be refined), which reduces the subjectiveness and hence the potential for conflict. -- Daniel Morissette http://www.mapgears.com/ ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Comment on OSGeo Project Marketing template before we set it in stone
i think we need more "art" to the design template, this is more techical guy marketing with OSGeo logo we need more green to the templte F ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] 5 Star OSGeo project maturity rating [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
Jason / Cameron, >From the potential utiliser / implementer viewpoint: I'd like to think that any project that has graduated OSGeo Incubation could be considered a quality project with all of the vectors described by Andrea. This proposed rating system implies that this may not be the case. Comments? Bruce On 6/06/10 10:14 AM, "Jason Birch" wrote: Wow, I'm really having opinions this week :) IMHO getting into rating projects is just asking for trouble, infighting, bitterness, and people/projects walking away from OSGeo. Jason On 5 June 2010 16:37, Cameron Shorter wrote: Andrea and others, does this fit with people's expectations? ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Comment on OSGeo Project Marketing template before we set it in stone
You are going to have to ask Tyler for more detail. For my part I have seen them handed out; raised a couple issues with respect to Font use, made an open office template for slides and workbooks myself for foss4g and that is all I know. Jody On 07/06/2010, at 5:48 AM, Jason Birch wrote: > Jody, > > Is that under http://svn.osgeo.org/osgeo/marketing/flyer/ or is there another > source for it? > > Jason > > On 5 June 2010 19:40, Jody Garnett wrote: > You should find that an official marketing template is already available as > part of the work the graphics designed has done. My trouble is that I have > not seen it in open office yet. > > ___ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Comment on OSGeo Project Marketing template before we set it in stone
On 07/06/10 05:29, Stefan Steiniger wrote: what I miss: - a line on supported platforms - not sure if applicable to all: supported customization/scipting languages (if not too geeky) Good suggestions Stefan, I've added to the source Open Office doc here: https://svn.osgeo.org/osgeo/livedvd/gisvm/trunk/doc/descriptions/postgis_overview.odt -- Cameron Shorter Geospatial Director Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050 Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254 Think Globally, Fix Locally Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source http://www.lisasoft.com ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Comment on OSGeo Project Marketing template before we set it in stone
Jody, Is that under http://svn.osgeo.org/osgeo/marketing/flyer/ or is there another source for it? Jason On 5 June 2010 19:40, Jody Garnett wrote: > You should find that an official marketing template is already available as > part of the work the graphics designed has done. My trouble is that I have > not seen it in open office yet. > > ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] 5 Star OSGeo project maturity rating
speaking for a project, i.e. OpenJUMP, that will probably not enter OSGeo in the near future (its not that we don't want [we had a positive vote for last year], but a lack of - volunteer - time to do the necessary efforts and rather concentrate on improvements of the software): I am fine with 5 stars as long as this ranking would be decribed somewhere at the bottom of the flyer - because we could have at max 3 stars. Now, is there space for that? And... the ranking doesn't need to be science (i like all the criteria outlined by Andrea, but...): The simpler the better to understand for the "potential user". stefan ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Comment on OSGeo Project Marketing template before we set it in stone
Hei, what I miss: - a line on supported platforms - not sure if applicable to all: supported customization/scipting languages (if not too geeky) and, I like it to be a OpenOffice doc, though Adobe Illustrator is fine for me too. stefan ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
