Hi, In principle there is nothing wrong with the introduction of a PSC.
However, the question of how it is organized and what problems it is intended to help solve should be clarified beforehand. You wrote: > One advantage of the PSC is that difficult decisions are made on behalf on > the group, which avoids them to be borne by individuals. Having a PSC > doesn't obviously exclude trying to reach consensus among the broader > community. Not everything needs to be formally discussed and voted. > Normal bug-fixing or "small" new features can be dealt in merge requests as > usual, and don't require email traffic. But removing tools or functionality, > break of backward compatibility, or significant addition of new functionality > are topics for discussion and formal votes. But here it shouldn't just be an attempt to reach a consensus; it should always be the first method of choice. Basically, I believe that a PSC can be used to modernize libtiff carefully and in small steps. My 2 cents as a simple user, Best regards Andreas -- team member “long-term preservation“ Saxon State- and University Library Dresden (SLUB) Department 2 (IT), Division 2.3 (infrastructure and digital long-term preservation) Zellescher Weg 18 | 01069 Dresden phone: +49 351 4677 763 E-Mail: andreas.rome...@slub-dresden.de http://www.slub-dresden.de/ | @slubdresden > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Tiff <tiff-boun...@lists.osgeo.org> Im Auftrag von Even Rouault via Tiff > Gesendet: Dienstag, 27. Februar 2024 16:08 > An: tiff@lists.osgeo.org > Cc: Lyanguzov, Timothy <timothy.lyangu...@sap.com> > Betreff: [Tiff] Proposition for the creation of a libtiff project steering > committee > > Dear libtiff community, > > The libtiff project has run for many years without a formal governing body, > and while it has worked well for most of the time, when difficult non- > consensual decisions have to be made, it has showed its limits. Recently this > was the case for the removal in the default build of the retired TIFF > command line utilities. Hence with a group of other stakeholders including > me, Su Laus, Bob Friesenhahn, Leonard Rosenthol, Roger Leigh, Olivier > Paquet and Timothy Lyanguzov, we are proposing to form a Project Steering > Committee (PSC) for libtiff, with us as the initial members of the PSC. That > committee would have voting powers to make decisions on behalf of the > project. This is a structure that is heavily used in most of the projects > affiliated with the Open Source Geospatial Foundation (OSGeo) in the > geospatial field where I'm involved. A rather successful model for the > working and scope of such a committee is for example the one used by the > GDAL (https://gdal.org/development/rfc/rfc1_pmc.html) and MapServer > (https://mapserver.org/development/rfc/ms-rfc-23.html ) projects since > 2007 > > Those rules have served well those projects in the last 17 years, and can > handle situations where PSC members become inactive without formally > resigning (the PSC can of course also decide to formally remove members > that no longer participate). So we are considering taking strong inspiration > from them for the working of the libtiff PSC . In the adaptations that have > been discussed between us, the 2 business day minimum delay indicated for > formal votes is probably too short given libtiff usual pace and could be > extended to 5. For GDAL and MapServer, we also traditionally put adoption > of release candidates as final approved releases to a PSC vote. It could be > discussed if we'd want to do that for libtiff too. For the concrete mode of > operation, typically in GDAL, when a formal decision has to be made, there is > a first round of emails "Call for discussion: topic XXXX", and once the > discussion seems to have come to a conclusion there's a "Motion: decision > XXXX" where PSC members cast their +1, +0, 0, -0, -1 votes. > > One advantage of the PSC is that difficult decisions are made on behalf on > the group, which avoids them to be borne by individuals. Having a PSC > doesn't obviously exclude trying to reach consensus among the broader > community. Not everything needs to be formally discussed and voted. > Normal bug-fixing or "small" new features can be dealt in merge requests as > usual, and don't require email traffic. But removing tools or functionality, > break of backward compatibility, or significant addition of new functionality > are topics for discussion and formal votes. > > So, this email is to gather feedback from the libtiff community at large to > check if the idea of a PSC, and its proposed initial membership, makes sense. > If people would like to be included to the initial PSC, they can (possibly > privately) reach to us, so we can discuss this possibility. > > Best regards, > > -- > http://www.spatialys.com > My software is free, but my time generally not.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Tiff mailing list Tiff@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/tiff
