I completely understand Daniel, I think a "star" belittles the amount of work (and operational change) involved in meeting OSGeo's requirements.
If it helps I am not talking about diluting incubation, instead opening up to more projects (by forgoing the requirement to have a mentor). All projects in incubation would be operating against the same graduation checklist. All of the projects in incubation currently have made significant progress, most are just waiting on a "sprint" or "sponsor" to grind through their code review. I wonder if pycsw could share how long their code review took? -- Jody Garnett On 5 March 2015 at 11:57, Daniel Morissette <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not sure I like diluting the "Incubated Project" status by turning it > into a star rating in which incubated and non-incubated projects are mixed. > > Incubated projects have taken steps to review their code and adjust their > way to operate to meet several requirements, and just a set of stars do not > relay that properly to the outside world. > > That being said, I have no alternative name to offer for the "OSGeo Labs" > pre-incubation status at the moment, so I'll stay out of the debate. > > Daniel > > > On 2015-03-05 5:52 AM, Bart van den Eijnden wrote: > >> Or you’re saying you want to address this with the stars system? So 1 >> star for existing labs projects for instance? >> >> Jody, as chair of the incubation committee, what’s your take on this? >> >> Best regards, >> Bart >> >> On 05 Mar 2015, at 11:51, Bart van den Eijnden <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> I don’t think you can put projects that have gone through incubation >>> and the projects that still have to incubate at the same level. But >>> that’s my opinion only. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Bart >>> >>> On 05 Mar 2015, at 11:18, Jachym Cepicky <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Guys, >>>> >>>> I think you are trying to find a term for something, I would like to >>>> get rid of. "OSGeo Project" is, what I would like to achieve for both >>>> - today's projects and labs together under one hat. >>>> >>>> Or anybody thinks completely different? >>>> >>>> Just my $.02 >>>> J >>>> >>>> čt 5. 3. 2015 v 9:08 odesílatel Suchith Anand >>>> <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> napsal: >>>> >>>> Yes, i think "Incubator Projects" is an appropriate name for this. >>>> >>>> Vaclav - Is this ok for you? >>>> >>>> Suchith >>>> __________________________________________ >>>> From: Bart van den Eijnden [[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>] >>>> Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 7:34 AM >>>> To: Vaclav Petras >>>> Cc: Suchith Anand; [email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>>> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] New incubation procedure >>>> >>>> I agree Community Projects is a confusing name. >>>> >>>> What about incubator projects? That’s the term that Apache uses. >>>> >>>> http://incubator.apache.org <http://incubator.apache.org/> >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Bart >>>> >>>> On 04 Mar 2015, at 23:25, Vaclav Petras <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Suchith Anand >>>> <[email protected].__uk >>>> <mailto:[email protected]><mailto:Suchith.Anand@__ >>>> nottingham.ac.uk >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: >>>> Thanks Jeff. >>>> >>>> Though we had lots of discussions afterwards and continuing on >>>> this , we couldnt find any solution till now. So this might be a >>>> good opportunity to modify the Incubation's "labs" term, to >>>> something like "Community Projects" to avoid confusion if that is >>>> acceptable to Vaclav, Jachym and others. Many thanks. >>>> >>>> Well, I'm not particularly fond of "Community Projects" as a >>>> name. Even mature FOSS projects are community projects in one way >>>> or the other. Unfortunately, I don't have other suggestion. >>>> >>>> Vaclav >>>> >>>> Suchith >>>> >>>> __________________________________________ >>>> From: [email protected].__org >>>> <mailto:[email protected]><mailto:discuss-bounces@__ >>>> lists.osgeo.org >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>> [[email protected].__org >>>> <mailto:[email protected]><mailto:discuss-bounces@__ >>>> lists.osgeo.org >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>] On Behalf Of Jeff >>>> McKenna [[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>__<mailto:jmckenna@__ >>>> gatewaygeomatics.com >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>] >>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 2:26 PM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]><__mailto:[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>__> >>>> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] New incubation procedure >>>> >>>> (we are approaching 2 full years that this "labs" naming has been an >>>> issue and discussed[1]) >>>> >>>> Today, knowing how ingrained the term 'lab' is in the GeoForAll >>>> education network, maybe Jachym is correct that it is a good time to >>>> modify the Incubation's "labs" term, to something like "Community >>>> Projects". >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/__pipermail/ica-osgeo-labs/2013- >>>> __June/000134.html >>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/ica-osgeo-labs/2013- >>>> June/000134.html> >>>> >>>> -jeff >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2015-03-03 3:42 AM, Suchith Anand wrote: >>>> > Vaclav, >>>> > >>>> > Please accept my sincere apologies as it was my mistake that i >>>> did not think on this when we started the ICA-OSGeo Labs >>>> initiative (so many things were going on at that time!). >>>> > >>>> > In universities, we generally use the "Labs" term to refer to >>>> infrastructure/people/__facilities for a particular subject. For >>>> example Botany Lab, Robotics Lab etc. And we wanted to make sure >>>> there is a dedicated Open Source Geospatial Lab in universities >>>> worldwide (which includes bringing together people from various >>>> disciplines, infrastructure (the physical space) and facilities >>>> to make this happen. Also it is easier to make use of the same >>>> terminology/structure of "Labs" which is widely used in the >>>> university environment to get academics start the initiative in >>>> their respective universities (also it is easier for them to >>>> convince their higher management on a structure that is known to >>>> them than reinvent a new term for this) . >>>> > >>>> > So it will very helpful for us if you can make use of new >>>> "OSGeo-projects" and metioned star (or similar) rating system for >>>> the incubation as then there is no confusion in the future. Many >>>> thanks for your consideration. >>>> > >>>> > Best wishes, >>>> > >>>> > Suchith >>>> > >>>> > __________________________________________ >>>> > From: [email protected].__org >>>> <mailto:[email protected]><mailto:discuss-bounces@__ >>>> lists.osgeo.org >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>> [[email protected].__org >>>> <mailto:[email protected]><mailto:discuss-bounces@__ >>>> lists.osgeo.org >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>] On Behalf Of Jachym >>>> Cepicky [[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]><__mailto:jachym.cepicky@gmail. >>>> __com >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>] >>>> > Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:27 AM >>>> > To: Vaclav Petras >>>> > Cc: OSGeo Discussions; [email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]><__mailto:[email protected]. >>>> __org >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>> > Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] New incubation procedure >>>> > >>>> > Vašku, >>>> > >>>> > just side note: yes, whith the new "Labs" initiative >>>> "OSGeo-Labs" have to change their name. >>>> > >>>> > My idea would rather be to get rid of current OSGeo- "labs" and >>>> "projects" and start with new "OSGeo-projects" and metioned star >>>> (or similar) rating system. >>>> > >>>> > Than for current OSGeo-Labs "OSGeo-project level 1" would make >>>> it (or similar) >>>> > >>>> > Jachym >>>> > >>>> > po 2. 3. 2015 v 18:33 odesílatel Vaclav Petras >>>> <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>><mailto:[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>>> napsal: >>>> > >>>> > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 6:44 AM, Jachym Cepicky >>>> <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]><__mailto:jachym.cepicky@gmail. >>>> __com >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>><mailto:jachym.cepicky@__ >>>> gmail.com >>>> <mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>>>> wrote: >>>> > former "OSGeo Labs" (now it has no name is slowly forgotten in >>>> past, but you can find more at >>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/__OSGeo_Labs >>>> <http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Labs>) >>>> > >>>> > Hi Jachym, >>>> > >>>> > do you think that with the renewal you can replace the name >>>> "OSGeo Labs" by something else? Now we have also ISPRS-ICA-OSGeo >>>> Research and Educational laboratories which might be often >>>> shortened to OSGeo Labs, although I prefer OSGeoRELs for writing. >>>> The mainling list is ica-osgeo-labs. Put perhaps it is not such >>>> an issue since the term "Geo for All" (http://www.geoforall.org/) >>>> is now used more and more (well, the linked website as OSGeo Labs >>>> in the title element). >>>> > >>>> > Thanks for taking this into consideration, >>>> > Vaclav >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _________________________________________________ >>>> Discuss mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]><__mailto:[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>__> >>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/__mailman/listinfo/discuss >>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the >>>> addressee >>>> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this >>>> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately >>>> delete it. >>>> >>>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in >>>> this >>>> message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by >>>> the >>>> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the >>>> University of Nottingham. >>>> >>>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an >>>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage >>>> your >>>> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email >>>> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as >>>> permitted by UK legislation. >>>> >>>> _________________________________________________ >>>> Discuss mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]><__mailto:[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>__> >>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/__mailman/listinfo/discuss >>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> >>>> >>>> _________________________________________________ >>>> Discuss mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]><__mailto:[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>__> >>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/__mailman/listinfo/discuss >>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the >>>> addressee >>>> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this >>>> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately >>>> delete it. >>>> >>>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in >>>> this >>>> message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by >>>> the >>>> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the >>>> University of Nottingham. >>>> >>>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an >>>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage >>>> your >>>> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email >>>> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as >>>> permitted by UK legislation. >>>> >>>> _________________________________________________ >>>> Discuss mailing list >>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/__mailman/listinfo/discuss >>>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> >> > > -- > Daniel Morissette > T: +1 418-696-5056 #201 > http://www.mapgears.com/ > Provider of Professional MapServer Support since 2000 > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
