To clarify this: I just got inspired by the open data classification. It also does not tell anything about the data itself, it's pure about how "open" they are.
But I really do not stick to stars to much. J On Fri, Mar 6, 2015, 16:01 Massimiliano Cannata < [email protected]> wrote: > Dear all, > The only concern is that stars are often identified with quality of things > (tripadvisor example) while the stars we are talking about are only > graduation level. > For this reason I would propose to use something different from stars, > maybe using colors from yellow to green or different icons (code provenance > passed, etc.) > > My 0.21 cents ;-) > Maxi > > > Il giorno ven 6 mar 2015 alle ore 09:08 Jachym Cepicky < > [email protected]> ha scritto: > > Guys, >> >> you are all naming it. >> >> I think, current incubation process does not work for reasons: >> >> 1 - incubation procedure is designed for big projects, big steps >> 2 - new projects are likely never pass it >> 3 - it does not cover the "post-incbuation" time >> >> result: only few projects proceeded to incubation recently, and >> incubation itself is long-term pain in you know where, instead of taking >> one big take-them-all steps, to transform it to smaller, easier to pass >> steps so there would be approach. and even projects with not huge >> ambitions, would be part of our family. >> >> already started to sort out current checklist at, please continue >> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/5-star-rating >> >> J >> >> čt 5. 3. 2015 v 23:53 odesílatel Angelos Tzotsos <[email protected]> >> napsal: >> >> Hi, >>> >>> For pycsw, we started code review discussion during FOSS4G 2014 Code >>> Sprint, but the actual review happened within 2-3 weeks. >>> >>> Best, >>> Angelos >>> >>> >>> On 03/06/2015 12:19 AM, Jody Garnett wrote: >>> >>> 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]> >>> <[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]> <[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]> <[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]> >>> <[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]> <[email protected]>] >>> Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2015 7:34 AM >>> To: Vaclav Petras >>> Cc: Suchith Anand; [email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]> <[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/> >>> <http://incubator.apache.org/> >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Bart >>> >>> On 04 Mar 2015, at 23:25, Vaclav Petras <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected] >>> <[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]>>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Suchith Anand >>> <[email protected].__uk >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]><mailto:Suchith.Anand@__ >>> <Suchith.Anand@__>nottingham.ac.uk >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[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]> >>> <[email protected]><mailto:discuss-bounces@__ >>> <discuss-bounces@__>lists.osgeo.org >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]>> >>> [[email protected].__org >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]><mailto:discuss-bounces@__ >>> <discuss-bounces@__>lists.osgeo.org >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]>>] On Behalf Of Jeff >>> McKenna [[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]>__<mailto:jmckenna@__ >>> <jmckenna@__>gatewaygeomatics.com >>> <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]>>] >>> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 2:26 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]><__mailto:[email protected] >>> <[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> <[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> >>> <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]> >>> <[email protected]><mailto:discuss-bounces@__ >>> <discuss-bounces@__>lists.osgeo.org >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]>> >>> [[email protected].__org >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]><mailto:discuss-bounces@__ >>> <discuss-bounces@__>lists.osgeo.org >>> >>> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]>>] On Behalf Of Jachym >>> Cepicky [[email protected] >>> >>> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]><__mailto:jachym.cepicky@gmail >>> <jachym.cepicky@gmail>. >>> __com >>> <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]>>] >>> > Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:27 AM >>> > To: Vaclav Petras >>> > Cc: OSGeo Discussions; [email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]><__mailto:[email protected] >>> <[email protected]>. >>> __org >>> <mailto:[email protected]> <[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]> >>> <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected] >>> <[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]>><mailto:[email protected] >>> <[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected] >>> <[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]>>>> napsal: >>> > >>> > On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 6:44 AM, Jachym Cepicky >>> <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]><__mailto:jachym.cepicky@gmail >>> <jachym.cepicky@gmail>. >>> __com >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]>><mailto:jachym.cepicky@__ >>> <jachym.cepicky@__>gmail.com >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]><mailto:[email protected] >>> <[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> <[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> >>> <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]> >>> <[email protected]><__mailto:[email protected] >>> <[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]>__> >>> http://lists.osgeo.org/__mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> <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]> >>> <[email protected]><__mailto:[email protected] >>> <[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]>__> >>> http://lists.osgeo.org/__mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> >>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> >>> >>> _________________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <[email protected]><__mailto:[email protected] >>> <[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]>__> >>> http://lists.osgeo.org/__mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> <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]> >>> <[email protected]> >>> http://lists.osgeo.org/__mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> >>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing >>> [email protected]http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Daniel Morissette >>> T: +1 418-696-5056 #201http://www.mapgears.com/ >>> Provider of Professional MapServer Support since 2000 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing >>> [email protected]http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing >>> [email protected]http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Angelos Tzotsos >>> Remote Sensing Laboratory >>> National Technical University of Athenshttp://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
