[sakai-pmc] Incubation questions

[Steve Swinsburg]

At the same time we need to be receptive to new processes that are
developed and make sense to apply to ensure the sustainability of Sakai
overall. Because something wasn't done for existing tools doesn't meant
that new processes can't be followed for new tools.

I have previously suggested that existing tools undergo the same process so
we can identify potential problem points. I am fine either way, but I would
like to know if any new tools are ever going to undergo an incubation
process so I can feed that back to the incubation group.

Maybe we can make things simpler, if they are even complex to begin with.

cheers,
Steve


On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Berg, Alan <A.M.Berg at uva.nl> wrote:

>  I would also say its about a level playing field and not changing the
> game at the last moment. With the skin manager which the LOI and others
> have been running for years. Where EDIA a long standing and endurent SCA
> has pledged support.  Let the code in with level conditions and ask them to
> go into incubation at the same time as release, upping the game.
>
> The process needs to community friendly with a bias towards minimal
> barriers to adoption. The risk for Sakai CLE is partially code quality
> (which I am qualified to have an opinion about), but also about entry
> barriers. Incubation is a great idea, as long as it does not affect the
> creative flow as we  expand the consortium of the willing.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>            Alan
>
>
> Alan Berg
>
> Innovation working group
> On the use of ICT in Education & Research
> University of Amsterdam
>      ------------------------------
> *From:* Steve Swinsburg [steve.swinsburg at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 17 December 2013 00:21
> *To:* Berg, Alan
> *Cc:* sakai-pmc at collab.sakaiproject.org
> *Subject:* Re: [sakai-pmc] Incubation questions
>
>     It's not about timing, its about being confident that new additions
> are well designed, developed and supported and aren't going to cause a
> major burden to the few people who end up being responsible for code that
> is no longer actively developed.
>
> The incubation process is designed to assist developers in ensuring that
> licensing, accessibility and internationalisation is squared away, that
> builds are standardised, that the development and support model is
> sustainable and to answer any questions. This is not an intrusive process.
> The developers get one on one assistance and at the end the project will be
> a sponsored by Apereo.
>
>  If all of that WAS sorted, then it would take very little time to run
> through that and be satisfied. There are questions about both JSF and
> licensing for the newer tools. These queries can be addressed and fixed
> where possible.
>
>  We don't have an endless pool of resources to accept more and more code,
> and people are increasingly being pulled in different directions. We need
> to ensure that whatever code goes into core is sustainable.
>
>  For the tools that I proposed, Roster2 has been around for a while, has
> tight integrations, is well supported and from my past experience in the
> incubation working group, ticks all of the boxes already. Simple RSS
> Portlet went through the Jasig incubation process and also ticks all of the
> boxes.
>
> I think it is prudent to be ensuring that any other tools also tick the
> boxes.
>
>  regards,
> Steve
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Berg, Alan <A.M.Berg at uva.nl> wrote:
>
>>  Isn't this simply a question of timing in the cycle and being as even
>> handed with all tools as possible? Or are we going to raise the bar for the
>> incoming late in 2.10 release process.
>>
>> I would set a moment to start after the 2.10 feature set decision with
>> very clear and equal rules of engagement.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>            Alan
>>
>>
>> Alan Berg
>>
>> Innovation working group
>> On the use of ICT in Education & Research
>> University of Amsterdam
>>      ------------------------------
>> *From:* sakai-pmc-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org [
>> sakai-pmc-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org] on behalf of Steve Swinsburg [
>> steve.swinsburg at gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* 17 December 2013 00:10
>> *To:* sakai-pmc at collab.sakaiproject.org
>> *Subject:* [sakai-pmc] Incubation questions
>>
>>     All,
>>
>> Is it the view of people in this group that no existing Sakai tools (in
>> contrib or elsewhere) that are to be promoted to core go through any form
>> of lightweight incubation?
>>
>> If so, what do you feel the incubation process is for?
>>
>>  It would be good to get that feedback back to the incubation group.
>>
>>  thanks,
>> Steve
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/sakai-pmc/attachments/20131217/647ffd21/attachment.html