Recommend deegree for graduation

[Jody Garnett-2]

OSGeo Incubation committee,

The deegree community has completed the requirements for incubation.

The appropriate links are:
- http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Deegree_Incubation_Status
- https://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/OSGeoIncubationCodeProvenanceReviewReport

The team has done an excellent job producing documentation that is
both clear and complete. It was a pleasure working with them
throughout the incubation process.

Jody
_______________________________________________
Incubator mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator

[Jody Garnett-2]

Just to be clear; the documentation is now ready for review. We have
asked deegree to make a couple of changes over the course of the
incubation process - this is our chance to see how well they have
taken effect and if both the incubation committee and the deegree
community are happy with the result.

As an example we asked to for a project steering committee to be
created; later learning that a technical steering committee is around.
Personally I would of been just as happy to have a representative from
the technical steering committee as the contact point for the OSGeo
board if that is the way deegree is used to working.

I am also interested in feedback from the deegree community on how we
can make our process more clear in the future.

It looks like we may have a meeting (or email vote) on a couple
pending applications, prior to the board meeting, I would like to
confirm that we have no need of reviewing deegree graduation materials
"in time" for next weeks board meeting. Please take your time to
review; and respond early and often.

Jody

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 9:46 PM, Jody Garnett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> OSGeo Incubation committee,
>
> The deegree community has completed the requirements for incubation.
>
> The appropriate links are:
> - http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Deegree_Incubation_Status
> - https://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/OSGeoIncubationCodeProvenanceReviewReport
>
> The team has done an excellent job producing documentation that is
> both clear and complete. It was a pleasure working with them
> throughout the incubation process.
>
> Jody
>

_______________________________________________
Incubator mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator

[Markus Schneider-4]

Hi Jody,

Jody Garnett wrote:

> As an example we asked to for a project steering committee to be
> created; later learning that a technical steering committee is around.

This actually is outlined in the procedures [1], but I just added the mentioning of the TMC to the Community Function
section on the official incubation status page to make this most transparent [2].

From now until the incubation meeting on thursday, we will leave the prepared wiki pages in their current status
(although some documents are still drafts), so it's ensured that the incubation board sees the same version and people
can talk about the same thing.

Best regards,
Markus


[1] http://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/StructuresAndProcedures#TechnicalManagementCommittee
[2] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Deegree_Incubation_Status#Community_Functioning

--
Markus Schneider

l a t / l o n  GmbH
Aennchenstrasse 19           53177 Bonn, Germany
phone ++49 [phone]       fax ++49 [phone]
http://www.lat-lon.de        http://www.deegree.org



_______________________________________________
Incubator mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator

[Cameron Shorter-2]

Quick review picked up:
http://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/StructuresAndProcedures#Committers
* A number of TBD and [JF ...] comments that should be cleaned up.

Regarding community:
* I see a number of developers contributing, which is good. What I'm not
sure about is the breadth of funding sources. Are all these developers
paid by the same sponsor? Or are the sponsors coming from differing
agencies and countries. This is important if we want to answer the long
term viability for the project.

Jody Garnett wrote:

> OSGeo Incubation committee,
>
> The deegree community has completed the requirements for incubation.
>
> The appropriate links are:
> - http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Deegree_Incubation_Status
> - https://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/OSGeoIncubationCodeProvenanceReviewReport
>
> The team has done an excellent job producing documentation that is
> both clear and complete. It was a pleasure working with them
> throughout the incubation process.
>
> Jody
> _______________________________________________
> Incubator mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>  

--
Cameron Shorter
Geospatial Solutions Manager
Tel: [phone]
Mob: [phone]

Think Globally, Fix Locally
Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source
http://www.lisasoft.com

_______________________________________________
Incubator mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator

[Jens Fitzke]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Cameron Shorter wrote:
> Quick review picked up:
> http://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/StructuresAndProcedures#Committers
> * A number of TBD and [JF ...] comments that should be cleaned up.

That's right. We did not yet manage to clean up everything. And then we thought
It'd be better not to change documentation while others review the artefacts.

> Regarding community:
> * I see a number of developers contributing, which is good. What I'm not
> sure about is the breadth of funding sources. Are all these developers
> paid by the same sponsor? Or are the sponsors coming from differing
> agencies and countries. This is important if we want to answer the long
> term viability for the project.

deegree has quite a broad funding base. The biggest part of it comes from
lat/lon's customers (mostly German public administrative bodies), but also from
customers of other companies and institutions who use deegree components for
their business. From what I know, I'd say that the total number of companies and
institutions which pay for deegree-centric services (and thus sponsor the
project) is about 80 to 100 (depending on what you'd consider as "active").

Jens

>
> Jody Garnett wrote:
>> OSGeo Incubation committee,
>>
>> The deegree community has completed the requirements for incubation.
>>
>> The appropriate links are:
>> - http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Deegree_Incubation_Status
>> -
>> https://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/OSGeoIncubationCodeProvenanceReviewReport
>>
>>
>> The team has done an excellent job producing documentation that is
>> both clear and complete. It was a pleasure working with them
>> throughout the incubation process.
>>
>> Jody

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkroh5AACgkQIaYc4TLqzo89ngCeMbW01b8vikSMToQk5r5a0eFa
3d0AnRB0ZldagFi89bOe+E/kC2W5vx0F
=SfMV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Incubator mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator

[Cameron Shorter-2]

Thanks Jens,
I haven't given the Deegree documents the review they deserve, and to
the level I normally look over incubating projects. (I'm still catching
up from foss4g).
However, before completing incubation, I suggest that you go through all
your documents and either:
1. Complete them.
2. Raise an issue in your issue tracker to fix them later. Although, in
most cases, I'd expect that you would try to complete your documents.

I apologize, I won't be at the incubation IRC meeting in a few hours -
it will be at 2am for us in Sydney, Australia. (A better timeslot for us
is 5 hours later, at 7am).

Jens Fitzke wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Cameron Shorter wrote:
>  
>> Quick review picked up:
>> http://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/StructuresAndProcedures#Committers
>> * A number of TBD and [JF ...] comments that should be cleaned up.
>>    
>
> That's right. We did not yet manage to clean up everything. And then we thought
> It'd be better not to change documentation while others review the artefacts.
>
>  
>> Regarding community:
>> * I see a number of developers contributing, which is good. What I'm not
>> sure about is the breadth of funding sources. Are all these developers
>> paid by the same sponsor? Or are the sponsors coming from differing
>> agencies and countries. This is important if we want to answer the long
>> term viability for the project.
>>    
>
> deegree has quite a broad funding base. The biggest part of it comes from
> lat/lon's customers (mostly German public administrative bodies), but also from
> customers of other companies and institutions who use deegree components for
> their business. From what I know, I'd say that the total number of companies and
> institutions which pay for deegree-centric services (and thus sponsor the
> project) is about 80 to 100 (depending on what you'd consider as "active").
>
> Jens
>
>  
>> Jody Garnett wrote:
>>    
>>> OSGeo Incubation committee,
>>>
>>> The deegree community has completed the requirements for incubation.
>>>
>>> The appropriate links are:
>>> - http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Deegree_Incubation_Status
>>> -
>>> https://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/OSGeoIncubationCodeProvenanceReviewReport
>>>
>>>
>>> The team has done an excellent job producing documentation that is
>>> both clear and complete. It was a pleasure working with them
>>> throughout the incubation process.
>>>
>>> Jody
>>>      
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkroh5AACgkQIaYc4TLqzo89ngCeMbW01b8vikSMToQk5r5a0eFa
> 3d0AnRB0ZldagFi89bOe+E/kC2W5vx0F
> =SfMV
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> Incubator mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>  

--
Cameron Shorter
Geospatial Solutions Manager
Tel: [phone]
Mob: [phone]

Think Globally, Fix Locally
Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source
http://www.lisasoft.com

_______________________________________________
Incubator mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator

[Jody Garnett-2]

Hi Cameron:

Your feedback is getting lost in the shuffle; there is an incubation
meeting tonight (at 2am!) where hopefully the contents of this
proposal will be talked about; I don't feel we have had enough
discussion and dialog as incubation committee members review the
documentation to act during this evenings meeting.

(Unless of course there is a silent majority which is being well ... silent).

So it look like we have two things to think about:
- diversity of developer community (if lat/lon goes under what other
organisations are represented)
- by similar token diversity of the PSC / relationship to the TMC

Please keep an eye out on these points as review the documentation; I
would like to be sure the documentation is communicating effectively.

I was worried that deegree may of introduced the PSC in order to
appease the incubation process; when their existing TMC was performing
the role already.

Jody

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 9:49 PM, Cameron Shorter
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Quick review picked up:
> http://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/StructuresAndProcedures#Committers
> * A number of TBD and [JF ...] comments that should be cleaned up.
>
> Regarding community:
> * I see a number of developers contributing, which is good. What I'm not
> sure about is the breadth of funding sources. Are all these developers paid
> by the same sponsor? Or are the sponsors coming from differing agencies and
> countries. This is important if we want to answer the long term viability
> for the project.
>
> Jody Garnett wrote:
>>
>> OSGeo Incubation committee,
>>
>> The deegree community has completed the requirements for incubation.
>>
>> The appropriate links are:
>> - http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Deegree_Incubation_Status
>> -
>> https://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/OSGeoIncubationCodeProvenanceReviewReport
>>
>> The team has done an excellent job producing documentation that is
>> both clear and complete. It was a pleasure working with them
>> throughout the incubation process.
>>
>> Jody
>> _______________________________________________
>> Incubator mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
>>
>
>
> --
> Cameron Shorter
> Geospatial Solutions Manager
> Tel: [phone]
> Mob: [phone]
>
> Think Globally, Fix Locally
> Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source
> http://www.lisasoft.com
>
>

_______________________________________________
Incubator mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator

[Frank Warmerdam]

Jody Garnett wrote:
> Hi Cameron:
>
> Your feedback is getting lost in the shuffle; there is an incubation
> meeting tonight (at 2am!) where hopefully the contents of this
> proposal will be talked about;

Jody,

The meeting is past.  I don't think Camrons input got lost in the
shuffle.  There was a response from the degree team on the question
of funding sources that clarified there are many organizations
providing funding (presumably mostly through the vehicle of lat-lon).

 >  I don't feel we have had enough
> discussion and dialog as incubation committee members review the
> documentation to act during this evenings meeting.

I agree.  We still have work to do as a committee reviewing documents
and asking questions before I think a motion to graduate is appropriate.

> So it look like we have two things to think about:
> - diversity of developer community (if lat/lon goes under what other
> organisations are represented)

I was pleased to see some diversity on the PSC.  I'm assuming that
if lat/lon when under or changed directions radically that at least
a few developers would fork off providing services and support to
deegree for the user organizations who are deploying it and providing
funding now.

I would say, I don't think deegree is much worse off in this regard
than MapGuide was with regard to Autodesk.

> - by similar token diversity of the PSC / relationship to the TMC

I am particularly interested to hear if the current TMC is seen
as adequately community oriented and participatory from the perspective
of non-lat/lon contributors to deegree.  Jody, if you can shed any
light on this based on watching the project mailing lists it would
be valued.

> I was worried that deegree may of introduced the PSC in order to
> appease the incubation process; when their existing TMC was performing
> the role already.

The TMC seems to be two people (a very small committee from my point
of view!) and seems to make essentially all technical decisions.  I
understand the PSC is essentially the court of appeal if a technical
decision made by the PSC is considered unacceptable to a developer.
Even if it only does this and a few other broad project oriented things
it would be fine with me.

Have there been technical disagreements in the time you have watched
the project Jody?  How were they worked out?

It's so much easier with a project like GeoTools where there was an
obvious schism to judge things on the basis of. OK, that wasn't
necessarily the greatest success of OSGeo style governance.  :-)

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, [hidden email]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent

_______________________________________________
Incubator mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator

[Jody Garnett-2]

>> I was worried that deegree may of introduced the PSC in order to
>> appease the incubation process; when their existing TMC was performing
>> the role already.
>
> The TMC seems to be two people (a very small committee from my point
> of view!) and seems to make essentially all technical decisions.  I
> understand the PSC is essentially the court of appeal if a technical
> decision made by the PSC is considered unacceptable to a developer.
> Even if it only does this and a few other broad project oriented things
> it would be fine with me.
>
> Have there been technical disagreements in the time you have watched
> the project Jody?  How were they worked out?

There have not been any disagreements mostly a steady steam of
questions from the user community.

> It's so much easier with a project like GeoTools where there was an
> obvious schism to judge things on the basis of. OK, that wasn't
> necessarily the greatest success of OSGeo style governance.  :-)

Well you know we we aim to please.

Jody
_______________________________________________
Incubator mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator