[sakai-pmc] Fwd: Edia skin manager for Sakai 10 (license incompatibility)

[Anthony Whyte]

This portion of the discussion, which touches on questions beyond simply the issue of licensing, deserves its own thread.  

anthony whyte | its and mlibrary | university of michigan | arwhyte at umich.edu | 517-980-0228


Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Kirschner, Beth" <bkirschn at umich.edu>
> Date: November 15, 2013 9:02:17 AM EST
> To: Noah Botimer <botimer at umich.edu>
> Cc: "sakai-pmc at collab.sakaiproject.org" <sakai-pmc at collab.sakaiproject.org>
> Subject: Re: [sakai-pmc] Edia skin manager for Sakai 10 (license incompatibility)
> 
> +1
> 
> On Nov 14, 2013, at 9:31 PM, Noah Botimer <botimer at umich.edu> wrote:
> 
>> Time for my refrain...
>> 
>> If it were easier to package tools for use and easier to find and install them, there would be a much richer ecosystem. There would be clearer demand (and likely corresponding support of some type) for the popular additions, giving insight into the things that are extremely well adopted (suggesting potential inclusion in a base distribution).
>> 
>> Basically, if contrib were better supported, base inclusion would be less attractive, and yet easier to execute when warranted. I consider that to be the more interesting problem.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> -Noah
>> 
>> On Nov 14, 2013, at 8:50 PM, Matthew Jones wrote:
>> 
>>> I was going to send out an email after Mark's question on that thread "what are the criteria for inclusion?". I couldn't find any defined/documented criteria other than really old stuff from 2005/2006.
>>> 
>>> The only tool addition we've had to Sakai since 2.7 (when the Product Council added a number of tools [1]) was Lessons in 2.9. This was basically a unanimous inclusion with strong support, running everywhere and no disagreement. There were no new tools in 2.8. From the 2.7 tool review the comment there was
>>> 
>>> "I'm also uneasy that we have relatively little in the way of objective criteria for the PC just yet, and we have not extended our review very 
>>> far in directions in which we've been weak in the past (e.g. accessibility). " - Clay Fenlason
>>> 
>>> A few weeks ago I'd mentioned considering parts of the Apereo incubation process for new tool inclusion but Steve didn't agree with that.
>>> 
>>> "We don't need incubation for tool promotions unless we as the PMC recommend it - ie the project was very new or we saw issues with it that needed to be worked through, or if the developer wanted it themselves. But of course that will slow things down." - Steve Swinsburg
>>> 
>>> While I don't think we need to go consider all parts of this incubation, reviewing things like this (licensing), i18n (at least that the tool supports language bundles), that the tool is running in production in X institutions and that it will be supported by someone at least up to the release I'd consider minimal criteria. Accessibility and UI consistency [2] would also be nice to consider if the tool is going to be used by non-admins, as this is something we hear pretty often and difficult to fix later.
>>> 
>>> Once a tool gets in, it seems very unlikely to get out, and it often requires long term maintenance from the community. New tools that provide useful functionality or those that replace unsupported legacy tools which will bring new adopters or increase the value to existing institutions are great for core Sakai.
>>> 
>>> [1] http://sakai-project-mail-list-archives.1343168.n2.nabble.com/Product-Council-2-7-Tools-Capabilities-Brief-td4046887.html
>>> [2] http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/sakai-user/2013-July/003530.html
>>> 
>>> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/sakai-pmc/attachments/20131115/cd279fc2/attachment-0001.html