First off, I'd like to thank each and every person who has dedicated any time and effort to the the cause of Open Historical Map. It's a huge undertaking that requires all of us. However, let's allow cool heads to prevail here. I don't think Jeff and his cohort are ill-willed and I'm very excited by the recent developments they've been working on for the OHM.
I do agree that the GitHub org has become very cluttered, but I think we can work through this without pointing fingers of blame unnecessarily. Rob, is there any particular reason why you're uncomfortable with sharing the devops/sysops load with others? I think we should prioritize getting the new codebase/website up ASAP. Let's focus on collaboration and good will rather than gatekeeping. Cheers! –Tod On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 7:38 AM Rob H Warren <[email protected]> wrote: > Storm in a teacup. Stop it. > > No data, commit, repo, branch or OHM contribution has been lost. The > github re-org is in line with vanilla best practices in industrial, > academic and open source projects. > > Your linkedin page lists job titles such as director of engineering, CTO > and product manager at Microsoft. Given the projects you've managed, you > should have been calling for this to be fixed a long time ago. The > "community" had been wrestling for some weeks about how to deal with the > hairball that the repos had become. > > Yes, it's a pain. I have to go through Albin since I have no admin access > myself but it is necessary. > > Now please let him do his job so we can all do ours. > > -R > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2019 19:22:41 -0700 > > From: Jeff Meyer <[email protected]> > > To: Albin Larsson <[email protected]> > > Cc: Rob H Warren <[email protected]>, > > "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: [OHM] Administrative changes to the OHM Github organization > > > > > > Hi all - > > > > Here is some background & questions with some details below: > > > > I’ve been paying developers to work on OHM features for the last couple > of > > years - timeslider, working search, refreshing site to current OSM, etc., > > with some new features coming soon, including: new inspector, new styles. > > The goal of this has been to deliver cool time-based mapping features to > > the community. They were also in line with documented OHM wish/need > items. > > > > We have not been able to deploy any of this software deployed, which I > > believe is driving the friction identified by Rob & Albin below. > > > > I agree with some of the goals outlined by Rob & Albin: > > - Having code reviewed by community members before deployment > > - Having a repo branch that represents deployed production code > > - Need for a code of conduct > > - We should align our github repos with best practices > > > > While I disagree with some of Rob & Albin's other actions/decisions, I’m > > also not sure the community fully understands their concerns. For > example, > > I don’t believe there was discussion of these concerns in any public, > group > > forum over the past year. Regardless of that, I want to see if we find a > > model that works so that everyone feels respected and valued. Right now, > > that’s clearly not the case. I’m also very sorry that it reached this > > breaking point. > > > > Rob & Albin - > > > > I sincerely hope that you will reconsider the recent pronouncements, > > restore the community access to github, and open a more interactive > > discussion about how to resolve your concerns. I’d suggest at least 2 > group > > meetings and a deadline to have a new model within a month, but would > > gladly engage in alternative community approaches. > > > > Key question: I know you have the community’s best interests at heart, > but > > do these decisions have the support of the community? How do you know? > What > > if they don’t? > > > > Thanks, > > Jeff > > > > P.S. I recently came across a relevant quote: > > > > “Open source projects hinge entirely on contributors. Without regular > > patches, the project dies. Or, as someone put it, rather ironically, in > the > > email that drove me out of the project: > > ‘A protocol spec only dies when people refuse to work together on it.’ “ > > - https://sealedabstract.com/rants/nanomsg-postmortem-and-other-stories/ > > > > DETAILS > > > > A quick bit of background on my involvement with OHM: > > > > - > > > > I’ve been intrigued with the concept of an any geo, any time based map > > since 2004 > > < > https://www.slideshare.net/gwhathistory/global-world-history-atlas-introduction-2004 > > > > > > > > - > > > > Around 2012, I came across the OSM community and the OSM stack and > > talked with a bunch of people (Steve Coast, Ian Dees, Mikel Maron) > about > > using it for historical mapping. Turns out, it had been discussed by a > > bunch of other people prior to that (Frankie Roberto, Schuyler Erle, > Tim > > Waters, Sanjay & others) > > - > > > > In late 2012 and early 2013, I helped set up the original OHM website > > along with Rob, Tim Waters, Sanjay, & others & hosted the first > Hangouts > > - > > > > From 2015-2017, I had to check out of the community for a few years due > > to work, getting married, etc. I regret that absence deeply. > > - > > > > In early 2018, came back to my passion, OHM, and found that little had > > changed in terms of features to the core website. The OHM Tasking > Manager > > <http://tasks.openhistoricalmap.org/> was up (Thanks, Bert) & that was > > and is awesome. The site itself was still up in spite of a scary > outage and > > hosting transfer (Thanks to Rob!). But, it was lacking new features > and the > > site were out of sync with mainline OSM. Unsatisfied with the pace of > OHM > > feature dev over the past 5 years and not seeing any motion for that to > > change, out of my own pocket, I hired a nonprofit dev firm > > <https://www.greeninfo.org/> with ties to Stamen <https://stamen.com/> > > and OSM board members. I asked them to start working on desired > features > > already identified within the community. Later, we added members of > > Development > > Seed <https://www.developmentseed.org/>, another firm with very close > > ties to the OSM community and also the original OHM sysadmin, Sanjay. I > > viewed all of these people as legitimate 1st-class members of the OHM > > community and with OHM’s goals and best interests at heart. All of the > work > > performed has been designated open source and as close to license free > as > > possible. No one involved in this effort has any commercial interest > in the > > work being done. We all just want to get features added to OHM and to > see > > it thrive. I have not wanted to identify myself as the source of the > > funding of these efforts on this list, as I have thought it wasn’t > > important, don’t want any credit, and don’t want this to be viewed as 1 > > person’s project. It’s not. It’s a community effort. > > - > > > > They have built the time slider you’ve seen on our prototype site, made > > search work, and are working on a new inspector and map style. We are > > currently trying to get this software deployed, which is driving some > of > > the friction identified in Albin & Rob’s mail. > > - > > > > I’ve also worked to make the OHM community more active and have been > > hosting frequent meetings, postings to the aliases, attendance at > > conferences, and outreach to other groups, which I’ve tried to share > with > > the community. > > - > > > > My ultimate goals have been to: > > - > > > > Get the OHM feature-rich enough to be a more appealing platform a > > wider user base > > - > > > > Make OHM a more appealing part of grant proposals > > - > > > > Essentially to make OHM a little closer to its stated vision of a > > rich environment for historical mapping > > > > > > I would suggest we use HOT OSM as a good comparable and example of how to > > encourage participation across a community and to create a rich > environment > > for application development. https://github.com/hotosm > > > > I’d also suggest we look at some basic best practices for github > > organization management, > > > https://github.com/todogroup/guides/blob/master/participating-in-open-source.md > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 1:40 PM Albin Larsson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Hi Jeff and thank you for sharing your concerns and questions. > >> > >>> Can you share some of the details about the "concerns about the > >> sustainability of the project" or of how the gatekeeper approach will > work? > >> > >> I do not intend to turn this into a gatekeeper approach long term. To > >> begin I think we need to make sure the code on Github represent the > code on > >> the server. Baby steps. Regarding pull request those will be managed by > >> whoever maintains a repository. The only repository which today > represents > >> code running on the server is the task manager one. Bert who maintains > it > >> have already full access to it and can merge pull requests. > >> > >> Before this change anyone of the many owners could delete any code, > invite > >> anyone, commit whatever code, and edit git history. We can't have it > that > >> way and we can certainly not deploy code we do not trust. > >> > >>> If I made a pull request to completely rebase the whole project, as the > >> code base is 7 years old, how would that be reviewed? > >> > >> No matter the organisation that would require both meetings and > >> coordination. I assume in the end when it comes to Github the repository > >> would be replaced with a new one. > >> > >>> what are the metrics of success for this model? > >> > >> The first aim is to to actually clean up Github and make sure it > >> represents the code on the server. To allow incremental change in the > first > >> place. > >> > >>> Contrary to Albin's assertion, I for one, am very confident about the > >> future of the project, but I do have concerns about our current lack of > >> governance and individual control over any parts of our operations. > >> > >> I read such concerns as sustainability concerns. I'm deeply sorry if I > >> have misrepresented someones concerns. > >> > >>> This project was started as a community effort, with community > >> consultation, and community input to how things should be done. I am > hoping > >> that will continue. > >> > >> It's my belief that this change and the clean up will allow community > >> contributions to be merged and deployed to begin with. Without that > >> possibility community meetings and input doesn't do much. While general > >> concerns regarding governance are related to this I consider such > concerns > >> out of scope for this particular effort. Solutions to those concerns > would > >> also require wider community consultation. > >> > >> Best regards > >> // > >> Albin Larsson > >> > >> On Fri, Nov 1, 2019, 15:53 Jeff Meyer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> Albin, Rob - > >>> > >>> Thanks for bringing these issues to light & thank you both for your > >>> leadership & hard work. > >>> > >>> I don't speak for the community, but there may be many questions out > >>> there about these points, I certainly have many questions, I don't > agree > >>> with many of the points above, and I'd love to see if we can organize > some > >>> community solutions. > >>> > >>> Can you share some of the details about the "concerns about the > >>> sustainability of the project" or of how the gatekeeper approach will > work? > >>> E.g. how will pull requests be approved? If I made a pull request to > >>> completely rebase the whole project, as the code base is 7 years old, > how > >>> would that be reviewed? Also, what are the metrics of success for this > >>> model? > >>> > >>> Contrary to Albin's assertion, I for one, am very confident about the > >>> future of the project, but I do have concerns about our current lack of > >>> governance and individual control over any parts of our operations. > >>> > >>> I'll send more thoughts in the next couple of days, but I find these > >>> steps to be quite strong reactions to some vaguely-referenced & not > openly > >>> discussed concerns. > >>> > >>> This project was started as a community effort, with community > >>> consultation, and community input to how things should be done. I am > hoping > >>> that will continue. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Jeff > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:48 AM Rob H Warren < > [email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> I want to thank Albin for taking care of the github organization, > which > >>>> is a thankless job. Projects on github were no longer manageable and > not > >>>> being able to track what was deployable and who-owned-what was > hindering > >>>> operations. OHM is going through the same issues that OSM and other > open > >>>> source projects have to deal with and this was necessary. Going > forward, > >>>> pull requests are going to be required to specific repos for any > >>>> operational deploy. > >>>> > >>>> There are many critics of this gatekeeper approach[1]; balanced out by > >>>> the chaos that results when too many cooks spoil the broth. Vectored > tiles > >>>> and the timeslider *will* be integrated into the main site and a > clustered > >>>> tile service is on its way. Please realize that the devil is in the > >>>> details, there is technical debt and there are moving parts that are > not > >>>> obvious. > >>>> > >>>> OHM is based on the OSM stack with all of its glitter and warts. Yes, > it > >>>> has acknowledged problems. It was also designed by people with the > >>>> foresight to support third party applications and authentication. If > you > >>>> think some great application is missing, go ahead and build it; no > one will > >>>> stop you. But before you do, take the time to read through the > relevant > >>>> standards and ask around: all of these standards have more than one > gotcha! > >>>> It's your time that's wasted if it doesn't work and half-baked > solutions > >>>> will not get deployed. > >>>> > >>>> It may be time for a code of conduct[2,3], through I'm not sure how to > >>>> formalize "We're not your employees" and "Be a decent human being". > I've > >>>> hesitated to discuss this publicly so far, but my watershed moment was > >>>> earlier this year when OHM "followed me to work". Someone (who could > be a > >>>> stand-in for "Pig-Pen" in the Peanuts comic) managed to get into a > >>>> corporate event to share their strong enthusiasm about OHM. It's still > >>>> unclear how a badge was issued but it did not reflect positively on > anyone. > >>>> > >>>> Besides the routine administrivia, I've received demands/requests for > >>>> root access, password files and raw database dumps. DNS requests for > >>>> services that were meant to die. Sometimes the request is politely > written, > >>>> sometimes not. The behaviour is best described by the quote: "The > reason > >>>> it's so vicious is because it doesn't matter". Also, we may have > never > >>>> written this down because it should be earthquake obvious but: OHM > has a > >>>> responsibility to its users and will not release its user data. > Period. I > >>>> can't make it any clearer. > >>>> > >>>> Lastly, OHM is a community project with a decentralized structure that > >>>> caters to a wide audience. This includes the survivalist in his log > cabin > >>>> on a 27th floor NYC condo, the teenager in his parent's basement > with an > >>>> unhealthy interest in the Sumer trade routes and other documenting > >>>> ...forgotten payphone locations? We don't judge, you are all welcome. > Do > >>>> what you are passionate about, go your own way and do good work. > >>>> > >>>> All my best, > >>>> R > >>>> [1] https://blog.emacsen.net/blog/2018/02/16/osm-is-in-trouble/ > >>>> [2] > >>>> > https://nolanlawson.com/2017/03/05/what-it-feels-like-to-be-an-open-source-maintainer/ > >>>> [3] https://lwn.net/Articles/759654/ > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Historic mailing list > >>>> [email protected] > >>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/historic > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Jeff Meyer > >>> 206-676-2347 > >>> osm: Open Historical Map (OHM) > >>> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Historical_Map> / my OSM user > >>> page <http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jeffmeyer> > >>> t: @OpenHistMap > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Historic mailing list > >>> [email protected] > >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/historic > >>> > >> > > > > -- > > Jeff Meyer > > 206-676-2347 > > osm: Open Historical Map (OHM) > > <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Historical_Map> / my OSM user > page > > <http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/jeffmeyer> > > t: @OpenHistMap > > -------------- next part -------------- > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > > URL: < > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/historic/attachments/20191102/ec368387/attachment.html > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Subject: Digest Footer > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Historic mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/historic > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > End of Historic Digest, Vol 76, Issue 3 > > *************************************** > > > _______________________________________________ > Historic mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/historic > -- Tod Robbins, MLIS todrobbins.com
_______________________________________________ Historic mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/historic
