qgis / PSC

2 stars 2 forks source link

Vision document #5

Open pcav opened 4 years ago

pcav commented 4 years ago

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-bh6gP3m2LrsuAEJ5eZM7uTjXNv5roRIA1sc8eN0Gxw/edit?ts=5cff5f9e#heading=h.4hvy87cjuibv Idea: crowdsource ideas? → next user question What is your vision for QGIS.ORG? What should be the goals of QGIS.ORG?

pcav commented 4 years ago

Braindump from Richard: It is some quick googling, and what I personally feel should be a FOSS project.

I tend to have a clear separation between the community/project and companies trying to make a living from it. The project should be leading, and not spend direct money on companies for features, but only for bugfixing, infra and architectural changes, preferably to individuals. In this way the project is hopefully better suited to steer/foster the project (only).

Companies make money by investing time/money in the project (because they live (partly) from it), AND they take money from user-groups/companies to implement things/fix stuff directly, but ideally in communication with the project (via QEP?).

I think a foss project should try to spread it's money over as much dev's as possible (actually to attract as much dev's as possible).

But this is personal. I tend to see Debian as a good example, but do not like all the rules they have in place... In my ideal world everybody thinks/feels the same about shared goals and values... but not sure if that is reasonable..

https://www.debian.org/social_contract

https://www.onecommunityglobal.org/purpose-mission-values/

https://www.ubuntu.com/community/mission

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/

https://wordpress.org/about/

Andrea's Geoserver responsibility and participation https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/Some-ideas-about-minimum-community-software-responsibility-and-participation

How to handle diversity and growth

QGIS is growing from a small community based project to a large(r) project being used and handled by a more and more diverse group of people. My feeling is that sometimes this (diversity) is giving some friction/frustration. We really like the project, it's community and the overall atmosphere around it. We think it is worth to step back and try to find what we need to get this thing going.

Maybe we can try to write down some guidance for community members on what we think is important to know. Not so much to have rules, but more like guides which can give a direction when we or somebody has a hard time.

Not sure where to start:

Positives?

Negatives (well, as I see it)?

Vision?

Values?

Philosophy? (from wordpress: out of the box, design for majority, decisions not optons, clean lean mean, Striving for Simplicity, Deadlines Are Not Arbitrary, The Vocal Minority,

Mission or Objectives = how, specific (SMART)?

Risks (what can go wrong)?

Users, Devs, Community, Project lead?

Future?

Some (please read/scan) food for thought:

https://www.linuxjournal.com/content/what-linux-journals-resurrection-taught-me-about-foss-community " "While the FOSS community still had the original nerdy members and new nerdy members continued to join, most of the growth in the community was from professionals. Many different professional Linux and FOSS conferences existed that were priced to attract people who could get their company to pay for them. These new community members were more focused on the practical benefits of Linux and FOSS (low cost, compatibility and the ability to modify code from a FOSS project for company use). Unlike the original community, these members were less focused on FOSS ideals."

I've thought a lot about how to write this down, but I keep getting around and having questions/unclearities.

I hope people find this interesting enough to think about it too, so we can put together some kind of 'guide' on how to handle the future.

QGIS will be free as much as possible

We will be transparent

Community is important

QGIS should be as stable as possible

https://www.linuxjournal.com/content/what-linux-journals-resurrection-taught-me-about-foss-community

" While the FOSS community still had the original nerdy members and new nerdy members continued to join, most of the growth in the community was from professionals. Many different professional Linux and FOSS conferences existed that were priced to attract people who could get their company to pay for them. These new community members were more focused on the practical benefits of Linux and FOSS (low cost, compatibility and the ability to modify code from a FOSS project for company use). Unlike the original community, these members were less focused on FOSS ideals. " " The FOSS community of today was different and more diverse. We needed to serve the whole community "

Should there be a distinction between?

SUPER READ: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/43zak3/the-internet-was-built-on-the-free-labor-of-open-source-developers-is-that-sustainable Pointing for example to: https://www.fordfoundation.org/about/library/reports-and-studies/roads-and-bridges-the-unseen-labor-behind-our-digital-infrastructure https://www.fordfoundation.org/media/2976/roads-and-bridges-the-unseen-labor-behind-our-digital-infrastructure.pdf#ford_roadsandbridges_WORKING_DRAFT.indd%3A.41267%3A83

and https://dhh.dk/2013/the-perils-of-mixing-open-source-and-money.html who says: "It's against this fantastic success of social norms that we should be extraordinary careful before we let market norms corrupt the ecosystem. Like a coral reef, it's more sensitive than you think, and it's how to underestimate the beauty that's unwittingly at stake. Please tread with care."

pcav commented 4 years ago

Let's discuss about this in Den Bosch