If we could add to your list:
4. Attract more volunteers to incubation
--
Jody Garnett
On 11 March 2015 at 06:05, Jachym Cepicky jachym.cepi...@gmail.com wrote:
Whatever,
I would like to achieve:
1 - attract more projects to osgeo umbrella
2 - attract little projects to osgeo umbrella
3 - define, what should happen after successful incubation, because I do
not believe in and lived happily ever after - to become the project,
certain level (checklist) has to be reached. But what if the project looses
it's community?
The still-callled-star system I started to work on, was inspired by
Cameron notes (just FYI)
J
st 11. 3. 2015 v 1:12 odesílatel Jody Garnett jody.garn...@gmail.com
napsal:
I will volunteer after foss4gna to look at this.
I am still interested in keeping our current procedure (as I think it is
producing good results) and relaxing the requirement for a mentor (which is
an embarrassing bottleneck).
Rather than a star system I think we can highlight how far along in the
checklist each project is.
--
Jody Garnett
On 10 March 2015 at 16:12, Bruce Bannerman
bruce.bannerman.os...@gmail.com wrote:
We need to be careful when playing around with our 'Incubation
Procedure'.
It causes considerable angst and disruption to both mentors and to the
relevant communities going through incubation when we keep trying to change
to rules.
From my opinion as a mentor, the current process while subjective in
some cases is still valid and effective in guiding a project to the ideals
that we as a community aspire to.
When a project graduates from incubation, it gains considerable
credibility as a viable open source spatial project. It is a badge of
honour for the project and something to aspire too. So why are we trying to
dilute this?
While there are aspects that could improve, what is the rationale for
wanting to change the process (together with the inevitable disruption that
follows)?
If we are serious about changing the incubation rules, then a more
formal methodology such as those referred to by Cameron at [1] may be more
appropriate.
Now, who has the spare time to investigate and drive this forward, **if
we deem it appropriate**.?
Are there any volunteers?
Bruce
[1] http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/incubator/2015-March/002644.html
===
I recently came across a number of Open Source Maturity Methodologies,
which is worth being aware of, and possibly incorporating and/or
referencing from OSGeo Incubation processes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software_assessment_methodologies
___
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
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
