Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects

[Tim Bowden]

On Thu, 2008-05-08 at 21:28 -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
> > Or, to quote the IETF, "rough consensus and running code".
> >   
> Except that the reference is to the informal criteria for when one might 
> even beginning to firm up a standard.  In the IETF community - unlike 
> pretty much every other standards body on the planet - there's a pretty 
> strong insistence that there are multiple implementations of something, 
> that  an talk to each other, before even thinking about pinning down 
> anything that looks like a standard.
> 

IMHO standards are just a fancy way of documenting the solution.  Until
you've build the solution, you don't understand the problem properly
[1].  If you try and write your standard while your understanding of the
solution space is underdeveloped, you'll end up with a pile of shite.

Development is relatively fast and cheap, whilst standards are slow and
expensive.  Start with required outcomes, develop the solution, then
document or "standardise" the solution.  Put them in the wrong order,
and you'll cripple both the solution and standard.

[1] ESR explains it better than I can in catb: lesson 3 in
http://catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ar01s02.html. 
 
Regards,
Tim Bowden

> Pretty much everybody associated with the IETF is funded by nice, large 
> government contracts or has nice positions at large corporations, or 
> both.  And pretty much all of the early code in and around the Internet 
> (and the ARPANET) was written by people with DARPA and NSF grants (when 
> they defined the TCP/IP protocol, Bob Kahn was either at BBN, my old 
> stomping grounds, or at DARPA, and Vint Cerf was a professor at 
> Stanford).  The original reference implementation of TCP/IP - which 
> found it's way into an awful lot of different Unix variants - was 
> written by folks at BBN, again, funded by DARPA.  Just read through the 
> library of RFCs at www.ietf.org and you'll find that most of the authors 
> have fairly serious organizational affiliations - they're doing the work 
> as part of their day jobs.
> 
> Not that I'm complaining, mind you.  Simply pointing out that leading 
> edge software tends to be written by folks with solid institutional 
> bases, and salaries, supporting them. 
> 
> Miles
> 

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects

[Miles Fidelman]

Michael P. Gerlek wrote:

Or, to quote the IETF, "rough consensus and running code".
  
Except that the reference is to the informal criteria for when one might 
even beginning to firm up a standard.  In the IETF community - unlike 
pretty much every other standards body on the planet - there's a pretty 
strong insistence that there are multiple implementations of something, 
that  an talk to each other, before even thinking about pinning down 
anything that looks like a standard.


Pretty much everybody associated with the IETF is funded by nice, large 
government contracts or has nice positions at large corporations, or 
both.  And pretty much all of the early code in and around the Internet 
(and the ARPANET) was written by people with DARPA and NSF grants (when 
they defined the TCP/IP protocol, Bob Kahn was either at BBN, my old 
stomping grounds, or at DARPA, and Vint Cerf was a professor at 
Stanford).  The original reference implementation of TCP/IP - which 
found it's way into an awful lot of different Unix variants - was 
written by folks at BBN, again, funded by DARPA.  Just read through the 
library of RFCs at www.ietf.org and you'll find that most of the authors 
have fairly serious organizational affiliations - they're doing the work 
as part of their day jobs.


Not that I'm complaining, mind you.  Simply pointing out that leading 
edge software tends to be written by folks with solid institutional 
bases, and salaries, supporting them. 


Miles

--
Miles R. Fidelman, Director of Government Programs
Traverse Technologies 
145 Tremont Street, 3rd Floor

Boston, MA  02111
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
617-395-8254
www.traversetechnologies.com

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects

[Michael P. Gerlek]

Or, to quote the IETF, "rough consensus and running code".

-mpg

 

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paulo Marcondes
> Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 4:20 PM
> To: OSGeo Discussions
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects
> 
> >
> >  Linus didn't write all of Linux. But he wrote enough for 
> it to be useful.
> >
> >  Too much philosophy, not enough code. :)
> 
> As Linus puts it: "talk is cheap..." =]
> 
> 
> -- 
> Paulo Marcondes = PU1/PU2PIX
> -22.915 -42.224 = GG86jc
> ___
> 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

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects

[Paulo Marcondes]

>
>  Linus didn't write all of Linux. But he wrote enough for it to be useful.
>
>  Too much philosophy, not enough code. :)

As Linus puts it: "talk is cheap..." =]


-- 
Paulo Marcondes = PU1/PU2PIX
-22.915 -42.224 = GG86jc
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects

[Paul Ramsey]

On May 8, 2008, at 3:32 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
With rare exception (there are geniuses among us), it's pretty hard  
for one person to accomplish all that much, in a short amount of  
time, in odd hours outside their day job.  At least none of the  
interesting projects I've been involved with required at least 6  
months of full-time work show initial results - not a part-time  
endeavor.


From tiny acorns do mighty oak trees grow.  Mapserver started with a  
shape file -> image renderer and an HTML templating engine.  Working,  
useful, code.  From that, you can grow a community, who can grow the  
code.  It might seem impossible to iteratively turn a Piper Cub into a  
737, but in the software world it seems to happen all the time.


Linus didn't write all of Linux. But he wrote enough for it to be  
useful.


Too much philosophy, not enough code. :)

P.
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects

[Miles Fidelman]

P Kishor wrote:

On 5/8/08, Schuyler Erle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

One important point that Fogel makes that I think is worth noting here
 is that the number-one sine-qua-non of *any* potentially successful
 software project is *shipping working code*.

 Until a developer does that, the discussion of whether or not his/her
 project needs or deserves institutional/organizational support to
 succeed further is moot.



Steve Coast (OSM) echoed the same sentiment very elegantly -- "Real
artists ship. For everyone else, there is wanking."

After a short hesitation, I have really come to appreciate it. Yup,
unless there is working code, everything else -- sponsorships,
organization, standards, committees, mailing lists -- is pointless.
  
Always one to provide a contrarian view, I've always felt that it always 
helps to start with a problem that's worth solving (speaking as an 
engineer), or something interesting to explore (from a scientific point 
of view).  From there, funding, equipment, and a good team of people are 
good next steps.  With rare exception (there are geniuses among us), 
it's pretty hard for one person to accomplish all that much, in a short 
amount of time, in odd hours outside their day job.  At least none of 
the interesting projects I've been involved with required at least 6 
months of full-time work show initial results - not a part-time 
endeavor.  Mind you, I'm a systems engineer and project manager by trade 
- it's been a long time since I've been involved in a project that 
didn't have at least a small team, working a hard problem, over an 
extended amount of time.


Ok, you can shoot at me now :-)

Miles

--
Miles R. Fidelman, Director of Government Programs
Traverse Technologies 
145 Tremont Street, 3rd Floor

Boston, MA  02111
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
617-395-8254
www.traversetechnologies.com

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects

[P Kishor]

On 5/8/08, Schuyler Erle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-05-08 at 12:03 +0200, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
>
>  > Yes it does. Karl Fogel describes it very well in his book
>  > (http://producingoss.com). I strongly recommend it to project leaders
>  > and developers who maintain just-opened and want to get dirty with
>  > principles of the FOSS world.
>
>
> One important point that Fogel makes that I think is worth noting here
>  is that the number-one sine-qua-non of *any* potentially successful
>  software project is *shipping working code*.
>
>  Until a developer does that, the discussion of whether or not his/her
>  project needs or deserves institutional/organizational support to
>  succeed further is moot.

Steve Coast (OSM) echoed the same sentiment very elegantly -- "Real
artists ship. For everyone else, there is wanking."

After a short hesitation, I have really come to appreciate it. Yup,
unless there is working code, everything else -- sponsorships,
organization, standards, committees, mailing lists -- is pointless.

Smart guy, that Coast.





>
>  SDE
>
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects

[Mateusz Loskot]

Schuyler Erle wrote:

On Thu, 2008-05-08 at 12:03 +0200, Mateusz Loskot wrote:


Yes it does. Karl Fogel describes it very well in his book
(http://producingoss.com). I strongly recommend it to project leaders
and developers who maintain just-opened and want to get dirty with
principles of the FOSS world.


One important point that Fogel makes that I think is worth noting here
is that the number-one sine-qua-non of *any* potentially successful
software project is *shipping working code*.


It's also a good idea to release early and often.
There is a temptation to bring a code with all possible issues smoothed 
away, but it defers release what might be bad if counted in months.


--
Mateusz Loskot
http://mateusz.loskot.net
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects

[Schuyler Erle]

On Thu, 2008-05-08 at 12:03 +0200, Mateusz Loskot wrote:

> Yes it does. Karl Fogel describes it very well in his book
> (http://producingoss.com). I strongly recommend it to project leaders
> and developers who maintain just-opened and want to get dirty with
> principles of the FOSS world.

One important point that Fogel makes that I think is worth noting here
is that the number-one sine-qua-non of *any* potentially successful
software project is *shipping working code*.

Until a developer does that, the discussion of whether or not his/her
project needs or deserves institutional/organizational support to
succeed further is moot.

SDE

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[OSGeo-Discuss] Calendar at USGS CLICK

[Mateusz Loskot]

Folks,

USGS runs a website for LiDAR geospatial technologies (CLICK), with an 
active bulletin board and calendar of geospatial events around the 
world. I found there a lot of various GIS events submitted
Perhaps it's an interesting place to spread some of FOSS GIS events too 
we are involved and interested in. As a small test, I submitted FOSS4G 2008:




Greetings
--
Mateusz Loskot
http://mateusz.loskot.net
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[OSGeo-Discuss] GeoWeb student contest - closing soon!

[Michael P. Gerlek]

As part of the GeoWeb 2008 conference, a Student Contest is being held
-- with significant cash prizes!

Deadline is next week, so get your entry in soon.

 http://geowebconference.org/students-academia/contest-information


(OSGeo is a happy little cosponsor of this event, as Open Source is a
required part of the entry submission.)

-mpg
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects

[Mateusz Loskot]

Howard Butler wrote:

On May 6, 2008, at 3:10 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the past i've heard it suggested that really successful open 
source projects now need serious organisational backing. They can't
 be built by a network of partly-funded enthusiast contributors 
alone.


I think really successful open source projects are successful because
 of serious organization, not necessarily a fire hose of funding.


Hobu,

I'm also sure that good organization is one of the most important
thing, and the hardest to get up and keep rolling in long run.
It also helps projects to move smoothly and gives an impression the
motion is resistant to obstructions. Indirectly, it's somehow a
guarantee that a project will stay alive for long(er) time.

I think OSGeo wants projects that are thriving communities for a 
number of reasons, but I'll leave it up to others to decide if we 
actually meet that bar with all of our projects.


I'd add interesting project that are going to build thriving
communities with the help of OSGeo. IOW, OSGeo could help some
projects valuable to the FOSS4G world to get open and alive in terms
of live participation in them.


Serious organization requires infrastructure -- something that's easy
 enough to get these days (SourceForge, Google dev, even OSGeo if you
 can jump through the hoops) -- but more importantly, it requires 
*use* of that infrastructure.


Yes it does. Karl Fogel describes it very well in his book
(http://producingoss.com). I strongly recommend it to project leaders
and developers who maintain just-opened and want to get dirty with
principles of the FOSS world.

One thing that I have found out recently when developing on a small 
open source project (http://liblas.org) is that Brook's notion about 
geometric communication load applies.  With a one or two person 
project, does it make sense to file every notable change into a bug 
tracking system, ensure that changesets only deal with one specific 
issue, and avoid communicating about design and code organization in 
forums that do not log things for posterity?


Yes, it *does* :-)

Let's use libLAS as an example of a newborn project. The community is
very small, but its developers are going to grow it. IMHO, even a small
team should exploit all available tools to increase chances of community
development, from the beginning. The tools I have in mind are included
in project infrastructure: lists, svn, bug tracker, website, blogs, etc.
If we move project discussions to the lists, the chances that someone
will encounter it get higher.
If we make a website, send some posts to our blogs...chances are higher.
Now, to answer your original question about submitting tickets I will
compile my answer using citations from Fogel's book:
(http://producingoss.com/en/getting-started.html#vc-and-bug-tracker-access)

"The importance of a bug tracking system lies not only in its usefulness
to developers, but in what it signifies for project observers. For many
people, an accessible bug database is one of the strongest signs that a
project should be taken seriously."

Why?

"Furthermore, the higher the number of bugs in the database, the better
the project looks. This might seem counterintuitive, but remember that
the number of bugs recorded really depends on three things: the absolute
number of bugs present in the software, the number of users using the
software, and the convenience with which those users can register new
bugs. Of these three factors, the latter two are more significant than
the first."

and the last that actually convinced me to this idea:

"A project with a large and well-maintained bug database therefore
makes a better impression than a project with no bug database, or a
nearly empty database."

The overhead to do that stuff is fixed, and quite expensive 
especially considering that you only have one or two folks writing 
the software hoping to get it to a functional point.


Yes, it does but please notice that the libLAS is a *very* young
project, and we still don't know what is it potential, how many people
it may interest, etc. We will know after 6 months or more, but not after
2 or 3. So, IMO one of the important role we have is to make a lot of
noise to reach potential users and developers.

FOSS projects usually have no resources to advertise themselves on TV,
but thay can generate a lot of traffic on the Net.


Getting back to overhead, when I started to work as a FOSS freelancer ~2
years ago, I didn't know that overhead, though I've been FOSS
contributor for >4 years before that. After 2-3 months, I encountered
that I'm writing *less* code per day than when I was working 8 hours a
day for a non-FOSS company and was spending ~2 hours a day coding for
FOSS after hours. I couldn't believe that fact, but it was (is) true.
Actually, it was a little disappointing because writing code is the only
thing I'm interested in my work life :-)
I analysed what was/are the reasons and I found that 1-2 hours of my day
I spend o