On 09/24/2013 02:57 AM, Daniel Morissette wrote:
On 13-09-23 11:08 AM, Paolo Cavallini wrote:
Hi Daniel,
I see two possibilities here:
* osgeo4w is an official foundation project, and as such it does not
need to apply for incubation (it would be circular reasoning); in this
case the PSC should be appointed by the foundation, or
* it is an independent project, thus following the usual procedure; in
this case, better not to use the osgeo4w name and logo, and let the
devs self organize.
Thoughts?
Hi Paolo,
Even the founding projects of OSGeo (MapServer, GRASS, MapGuide, etc.)
did go through incubation, so I think OSGeo4W should go through the
same path. Since it is already handled by people who know "the OSGeo
way" it will simply be faster and mostly a matter of running it agains
the checklist. If its incubation can be completed in a few weeks then
that's just better.
Daniel
Hi Daniel,
I am in favor of both OSGeoLive and OSGeo4W going through a few weeks
incubation process.
Best,
Angelos
--
Angelos Tzotsos
Remote Sensing Laboratory
National Technical University of Athens
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
