[GRASS5] GRASS Project Steering Committee and more

Dear GRASS community,

in the Chicago meeting the GRASS project was suggested to
as one of the initial OSGeo foundation projects.

So far I only received positive feedback on the idea of
moving GRASS more formally to the foundation (while the
individual authors are keeping their copyright which is
a major difference to the Apache Foundation.)

A couple of things will have to be sorted out in the
coming months to make GRASS's membership possible (below
list is inspired by Frank's mail to the GRASS project):

o We will need to form a "GRASS Project Steering Committee"
  (PSC). Foundation projects need a formalized management
  which may be desired in any case. I would be glad to
  receive suggestions of names for this committee. For
  inspiration, please look at the MapServer Technical
  Steering Committee as described here:

    http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/development/rfc/ms-rfc-1

o One benefit of the foundation is some degree of legal
   support and protection for the project. The flip side of that
   is that the foundation needs to ensure some degree of
   rigor and process in how code comes into the project. One
   part of that is getting committers to sign a legal agreement
   indicating that they agree that changes they commit will
   be under the license of GRASS (GPL) and that they have
   the right to submit the code (they wrote it, it is not
   patented, have permission from their employer, etc).

o We will have to review the existing code base (which is
   huge - more than 500000 lines of source code in GRASS 6).
   Luckily a major code review was already done for GRASS 5.
   Also the "Debianization" process was performed for GRASS
   5 and GRASS 6.

o It is suggested to move the support infrastructure for GRASS
   to new foundation systems. Stuff like CVS (maybe SVN then),
   and bugtracker and mailing lists. The web site will also
   likely appear under a foundation subdomain (ie. grass.osgeo.org)
   with hopefully the known mirror site structure as before
   with grass.itc.it, grass.ibiblio.org etc as principal mirror
   sites. If so, the web site will be migrated into a contents
   management system (CMS) in a harmonized "foundation style".
   A CMS will hopefully solve the problem to get more people
   involved in the Web site contents management.

o We hope to establish options to enable sponorship for the
   foundation - be as direct funding or for selected foundation
   projects. Details have to be worked out. My suggestion is to
   create national tax-exempt organizations (such as the
   German GRASS Anwender-Vereinigung e.V. which already exists)
   which may offer to receive donations.

o For now we should think about nominating people with
   recognized contribution to the GRASS project, to
   free data, to whatever deems significant. A small paragraph
   describing why the candidate is proposed as member to
   the foundation is needed as well. This will be announced
   more formally soon. Please see ongoing discussions here:
   http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

(Nearly) nothing is set in stone yet.
More details will follow, a couple of official documents
are being currently prepared

Your feedback is welcome.

Markus

Dear all,

while I already received two suggestions for a GRASS
Project Steering Committee (PSC), I suggest to post the
nominations in public, if there are no objections.
I would like to have that transparent to everyone.

Nominations should contain the name and a short paragraph
why it is a good candidate. We also have to decide,
how many members the PSC should have.

It is worth reading
- http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html
   (they are very successful, and the document applies much
    to the GRASS project culture)

- http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/development/rfc/ms-rfc-1/
   (MS RFC 1: Technical Steering Committee Guidelines)
    apparently 7 members there.

- http://lists.maptools.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/2006-February/thread.html#7881
    (GDAL PSC to be formed)

- http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/development/rfc/ms-rfc-10/
   (MS RFC 10: Joining the Open Source Geospatial Foundation)

Related:
- https://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=9682788&forum_id=475
  (Community MapBuilder PMC membership nomination)
- https://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=9673493&forum_id=475
  (MapBuilder & Mapbender and the OSGeo Foundation)

In fact, there is lot of material to digest in these days..

Markus
--
Markus Neteler <neteler itc it> http://mpa.itc.it
ITC-irst - Centro per la Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica
MPBA - Predictive Models for Biol. & Environ. Data Analysis
Via Sommarive, 18 - 38050 Povo (Trento), Italy

On Fri, 2006-02-10 at 18:15 +0100, Markus Neteler wrote:
Markus,

Comments are inline:

A couple of things will have to be sorted out in the
coming months to make GRASS's membership possible (below
list is inspired by Frank's mail to the GRASS project):

o We will need to form a "GRASS Project Steering Committee"
  (PSC). Foundation projects need a formalized management
  which may be desired in any case. I would be glad to
  receive suggestions of names for this committee. For
  inspiration, please look at the MapServer Technical
  Steering Committee as described here:

    http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/development/rfc/ms-rfc-1

I would like to make the following nominations to the GRASS PSC:

- Glynn Clements for his vast knowledge of standards, practices and
compatibility.
- Radim Blazek for his extensive GRASS work including vector and DBMS
support.
- Hamish Bowman for documentation, integration, and various modules.
- Paul Kelly for PROJ and platform support.
- Markus Neteler for obvious. :slight_smile:

I apologize if I missed anyone or misrepresented anyone's work.

o One benefit of the foundation is some degree of legal
   support and protection for the project. The flip side of that
   is that the foundation needs to ensure some degree of
   rigor and process in how code comes into the project. One
   part of that is getting committers to sign a legal agreement
   indicating that they agree that changes they commit will
   be under the license of GRASS (GPL) and that they have
   the right to submit the code (they wrote it, it is not
   patented, have permission from their employer, etc).

I like this. It'll provide a degree of IP protection for the project.

o We will have to review the existing code base (which is
   huge - more than 500000 lines of source code in GRASS 6).
   Luckily a major code review was already done for GRASS 5.
   Also the "Debianization" process was performed for GRASS
   5 and GRASS 6.

Can this affect what libraries we're "allowed" to link against or does
it apply only to GRASS code?

o It is suggested to move the support infrastructure for GRASS
   to new foundation systems. Stuff like CVS (maybe SVN then),
   and bugtracker and mailing lists. The web site will also
   likely appear under a foundation subdomain (ie. grass.osgeo.org)
   with hopefully the known mirror site structure as before
   with grass.itc.it, grass.ibiblio.org etc as principal mirror
   sites. If so, the web site will be migrated into a contents
   management system (CMS) in a harmonized "foundation style".
   A CMS will hopefully solve the problem to get more people
   involved in the Web site contents management.

o We hope to establish options to enable sponorship for the
   foundation - be as direct funding or for selected foundation
   projects. Details have to be worked out. My suggestion is to
   create national tax-exempt organizations (such as the
   German GRASS Anwender-Vereinigung e.V. which already exists)
   which may offer to receive donations.

My only concern is that the foundation could interfere with developer
commits. OTOH, the foundation could speed development by tackling some
of the longstanding headaches that need to be hashed out.

o For now we should think about nominating people with
   recognized contribution to the GRASS project, to
   free data, to whatever deems significant. A small paragraph
   describing why the candidate is proposed as member to
   the foundation is needed as well. This will be announced
   more formally soon. Please see ongoing discussions here:
   http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Let me know if I should formalize and expand my above nominations.

Markus Neteler wrote:

o One benefit of the foundation is some degree of legal
   support and protection for the project. The flip side of that
   is that the foundation needs to ensure some degree of
   rigor and process in how code comes into the project. One
   part of that is getting committers to sign a legal agreement
   indicating that they agree that changes they commit will
   be under the license of GRASS (GPL) and that they have
   the right to submit the code (they wrote it, it is not
   patented, have permission from their employer, etc).

Regarding the "not patented" bit, I hope that they are only asking for
a declaration that the author isn't aware of any applicable patents,
not indemnity against "accidental" infringment.

--
Glynn Clements <glynn@gclements.plus.com>

On Sat, 2006-02-11 at 01:36 +0000, Glynn Clements wrote:

Markus Neteler wrote:

> o One benefit of the foundation is some degree of legal
> support and protection for the project. The flip side of that
> is that the foundation needs to ensure some degree of
> rigor and process in how code comes into the project. One
> part of that is getting committers to sign a legal agreement
> indicating that they agree that changes they commit will
> be under the license of GRASS (GPL) and that they have
> the right to submit the code (they wrote it, it is not
> patented, have permission from their employer, etc).

Regarding the "not patented" bit, I hope that they are only asking for
a declaration that the author isn't aware of any applicable patents,
not indemnity against "accidental" infringment.

That's how I'd interpret it. Moreover, when I submitted code to the
FSF, I recall saying that I did not knowingly infringe any patents. I
believe that's good enough, and I also believe that there are companies
and consortia who have committed to defend such contributions to open
source based on such good-faith representations.

M

Dear all,

I have collected the nominations for the
proposed " GRASS Project Steering Committee" (PSC)
here:

http://grass.gdf-hannover.de/twiki/bin/view/GRASS/ProjectSteeringCommitee#Nominations

Please have a look.

Markus

Markus Neteler for for obvious
for the
pc

At 17:15, mercoledì 15 febbraio 2006, Markus Neteler has probably written:

Dear all,

I have collected the nominations for the
proposed " GRASS Project Steering Committee" (PSC)
here:

http://grass.gdf-hannover.de/twiki/bin/view/GRASS/ProjectSteeringCommitee#N
ominations

Please have a look.

Markus

_______________________________________________
grass5 mailing list
grass5@grass.itc.it
http://grass.itc.it/mailman/listinfo/grass5

--
Paolo Cavallini
email+jabber: cavallini@faunalia.it
www.faunalia.it
Piazza Garibaldi 5 - 56025 Pontedera (PI), Italy Tel: (+39)348-3801953

Markus Neteler wrote:

I have collected the nominations for the
proposed " GRASS Project Steering Committee" (PSC)
here:

http://grass.gdf-hannover.de/twiki/bin/view/GRASS/ProjectSteeringCommitee#Nominations

I'll have to decline my nomination.

--
Glynn Clements <glynn@gclements.plus.com>

Dear all,

since the earlier proposed Contributor Agreement of the OSGeo
Foundation is a non-issue now (no longer a requirement),
I would like to push the idea again of forming a Project
Steering Committee. In any case we should have such a
structure to make GRASS more independent from individuals
(in particular, if they aren't available) to take decisions.

The list of nominations which we got so far is here:
http://grass.gdf-hannover.de/twiki/bin/view/GRASS/ProjectSteeringCommitee#Nominations

Please take a look how the other projects handle this.
With a growing GRASS project I would really like to
see some more formal approach of deciding things, at least,
to have it as backup (in history, decisions worked out smooth in
the majority of the cases).

I also feel that OSGeo could become a (second) home to ensure
that the software and its infrastructure remains available long
term. If you look at the member lists of the foundation, you
will find many active people there who push for a better integration
between GFOSS projects and other projects like Educational Outreach
or public geodata.

Thanks

Markus

On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 12:16:29AM +0100, Markus Neteler wrote:

Dear all,

while I already received two suggestions for a GRASS
Project Steering Committee (PSC), I suggest to post the
nominations in public, if there are no objections.
I would like to have that transparent to everyone.

Nominations should contain the name and a short paragraph
why it is a good candidate. We also have to decide,
how many members the PSC should have.

It is worth reading
- http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html
   (they are very successful, and the document applies much
    to the GRASS project culture)

- http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/development/rfc/ms-rfc-1/
   (MS RFC 1: Technical Steering Committee Guidelines)
    apparently 7 members there.

- http://lists.maptools.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/2006-February/thread.html#7881
    (GDAL PSC to be formed)

- http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/development/rfc/ms-rfc-10/
   (MS RFC 10: Joining the Open Source Geospatial Foundation)

Related:
- https://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=9682788&forum_id=475
  (Community MapBuilder PMC membership nomination)
- https://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=9673493&forum_id=475
  (MapBuilder & Mapbender and the OSGeo Foundation)

In fact, there is lot of material to digest in these days..

Markus
--
Markus Neteler <neteler itc it> http://mpa.itc.it
ITC-irst - Centro per la Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica
MPBA - Predictive Models for Biol. & Environ. Data Analysis
Via Sommarive, 18 - 38050 Povo (Trento), Italy

_______________________________________________
grass5 mailing list
grass5@grass.itc.it
http://grass.itc.it/mailman/listinfo/grass5

At the moment, GRASS seems somewhere between Apache and GDAL in its
organization--and possible contributor/user base.

We might think of something that can start out somewhat less formal, like
MapServer, but be able to scale up to something more formal, like Apache, if
needed in the future. I haven't thought what that might be yet, of course
:wink:

Michael

On 4/5/06 3:29 PM, "Markus Neteler" <neteler@itc.it> wrote:

Dear all,

since the earlier proposed Contributor Agreement of the OSGeo
Foundation is a non-issue now (no longer a requirement),
I would like to push the idea again of forming a Project
Steering Committee. In any case we should have such a
structure to make GRASS more independent from individuals
(in particular, if they aren't available) to take decisions.

The list of nominations which we got so far is here:

http://grass.gdf-hannover.de/twiki/bin/view/GRASS/ProjectSteeringCommitee#Nomi
nations

Please take a look how the other projects handle this.
With a growing GRASS project I would really like to
see some more formal approach of deciding things, at least,
to have it as backup (in history, decisions worked out smooth in
the majority of the cases).

I also feel that OSGeo could become a (second) home to ensure
that the software and its infrastructure remains available long
term. If you look at the member lists of the foundation, you
will find many active people there who push for a better integration
between GFOSS projects and other projects like Educational Outreach
or public geodata.

Thanks

Markus

On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 12:16:29AM +0100, Markus Neteler wrote:

Dear all,

while I already received two suggestions for a GRASS
Project Steering Committee (PSC), I suggest to post the
nominations in public, if there are no objections.
I would like to have that transparent to everyone.

Nominations should contain the name and a short paragraph
why it is a good candidate. We also have to decide,
how many members the PSC should have.

It is worth reading
- How the ASF works
   (they are very successful, and the document applies much
    to the GRASS project culture)

- http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/development/rfc/ms-rfc-1/
   (MS RFC 1: Technical Steering Committee Guidelines)
    apparently 7 members there.

- http://lists.maptools.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/2006-February/thread.html#7881
    (GDAL PSC to be formed)

- http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/development/rfc/ms-rfc-10/
   (MS RFC 10: Joining the Open Source Geospatial Foundation)

Related:
-
https://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=9682788&forum_id=475
  (Community MapBuilder PMC membership nomination)
-
https://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=9673493&forum_id=475
  (MapBuilder & Mapbender and the OSGeo Foundation)

In fact, there is lot of material to digest in these days..

Markus
--
Markus Neteler <neteler itc it> http://mpa.itc.it
ITC-irst - Centro per la Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica
MPBA - Predictive Models for Biol. & Environ. Data Analysis
Via Sommarive, 18 - 38050 Povo (Trento), Italy

_______________________________________________
grass5 mailing list
grass5@grass.itc.it
http://grass.itc.it/mailman/listinfo/grass5

___________________________
Michael Barton, Professor of Anthropology
School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Arizona State University

WWW - http://www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton
Phone: 480-965-6262
Fax: 480-965-7671

Michael,

Mapserver does have a MapServer Technical Steering Committee
since 2005/07/12:
http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/development/rfc/ms-rfc-1/

But I see that the interest here is very low.

Markus

On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 08:23:53PM -0700, Michael Barton wrote:

At the moment, GRASS seems somewhere between Apache and GDAL in its
organization--and possible contributor/user base.

We might think of something that can start out somewhat less formal, like
MapServer, but be able to scale up to something more formal, like Apache, if
needed in the future. I haven't thought what that might be yet, of course
:wink:

Michael

On 4/5/06 3:29 PM, "Markus Neteler" <neteler@itc.it> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> since the earlier proposed Contributor Agreement of the OSGeo
> Foundation is a non-issue now (no longer a requirement),
> I would like to push the idea again of forming a Project
> Steering Committee. In any case we should have such a
> structure to make GRASS more independent from individuals
> (in particular, if they aren't available) to take decisions.
>
> The list of nominations which we got so far is here:
>
> http://grass.gdf-hannover.de/twiki/bin/view/GRASS/ProjectSteeringCommitee#Nomi
> nations
>
> Please take a look how the other projects handle this.
> With a growing GRASS project I would really like to
> see some more formal approach of deciding things, at least,
> to have it as backup (in history, decisions worked out smooth in
> the majority of the cases).
>
> I also feel that OSGeo could become a (second) home to ensure
> that the software and its infrastructure remains available long
> term. If you look at the member lists of the foundation, you
> will find many active people there who push for a better integration
> between GFOSS projects and other projects like Educational Outreach
> or public geodata.
>
> Thanks
>
> Markus
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 12:16:29AM +0100, Markus Neteler wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> while I already received two suggestions for a GRASS
>> Project Steering Committee (PSC), I suggest to post the
>> nominations in public, if there are no objections.
>> I would like to have that transparent to everyone.
>>
>> Nominations should contain the name and a short paragraph
>> why it is a good candidate. We also have to decide,
>> how many members the PSC should have.
>>
>> It is worth reading
>> - http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html
>> (they are very successful, and the document applies much
>> to the GRASS project culture)
>>
>> - http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/development/rfc/ms-rfc-1/
>> (MS RFC 1: Technical Steering Committee Guidelines)
>> apparently 7 members there.
>>
>> - http://lists.maptools.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/2006-February/thread.html#7881
>> (GDAL PSC to be formed)
>>
>> - http://mapserver.gis.umn.edu/development/rfc/ms-rfc-10/
>> (MS RFC 10: Joining the Open Source Geospatial Foundation)
>>
>> Related:
>> -
>> https://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=9682788&forum_id=475
>> (Community MapBuilder PMC membership nomination)
>> -
>> https://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=9673493&forum_id=475
>> (MapBuilder & Mapbender and the OSGeo Foundation)
>>
>> In fact, there is lot of material to digest in these days..
>>
>> Markus
>> --
>> Markus Neteler <neteler itc it> http://mpa.itc.it
>> ITC-irst - Centro per la Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica
>> MPBA - Predictive Models for Biol. & Environ. Data Analysis
>> Via Sommarive, 18 - 38050 Povo (Trento), Italy
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> grass5 mailing list
>> grass5@grass.itc.it
>> http://grass.itc.it/mailman/listinfo/grass5
>

___________________________
Michael Barton, Professor of Anthropology
School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Arizona State University

WWW - http://www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton
Phone: 480-965-6262
Fax: 480-965-7671