Apply to be an OSGeo Project

[Robinlovelace]

Building on previous discussion this is a specific suggestion to follow the guidance here to become an OSGeo Community Project: https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Community_Projects

To become a project I think we need to

send a description of your project to the OSGeo Incubation Committee Mailing List.

Looking at the archives it seems no request has been made for an R-Spatial Community project: https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/incubator/

Please comment on this thread to avoid going further off topic in #37. I'm up for giving it a 1st bash unless anyone else involved in the community would like to. I think as a starting point 'the repos in the r-spatial github org that are on CRAN' is fine and we can cross the bridge of how to add other packages such as raster/terra when we get to it and ask it as an open question (I'm in favor of including those assuming package authors agree).

[FelipeSBarros]

Hi, @Robinlovelace ! I came to this issue from "Whiy R? Discussion Panel - Geospatial. As you probably know I am not a core developer, so I am looking foward to help in other maners.

As I could understand the idea is to submit a description of the project to the OSGeo Incubation Committee to become an OSGeo Community Project. Right?

I believe that would be interesting to confirm which packages' authors agree to this proposal.

How could I help? Best regards

[Robinlovelace]

Thanks for getting in touch on this @FelipeSBarros, great you're up for helping out.

As I could understand the idea is to submit a description of the project to the OSGeo Incubation Committee to become an OSGeo Community Project. Right?

Correct. Yes you could certainly help. Next step I think is to draft an email to be sent to OSGeo. If you could put some ideas for that below - what are the key things we should say, that we've had long links with OSGeo packages, GDAL and PROJ in particular but also, dating back to 2000 links with GRASS thanks to @rsbivand. We're an open and supportive community looking to affiliate. Sure there are other things to say. Then someone just needs to send the email and, as I say, happy to do that unless anyone else wants to.

[etiennebr]

@Robinlovelace, thanks for keeping the ball rolling. I wanted to reply at least to mention I think this project is important. I'd like to help but I'm currently stretched thin so I can't really contribute before the end of the year. Please keep us informed.

[FelipeSBarros]

Dear @etiennebr and @Robinlovelace : Sorry for the long time without any contact. I will be finishing a few projects in the following weeks. After that I will have time to draft an e-mail messagea, as I am not so involved with those projects.. Best regards

[Robinlovelace]

Great, whoever gets round to drafting a message first - it's on various busy to-do lists, including mine, by the sounds of it!

[rsbivand]

A heads' up wrt. an ongoing thread on the gdal-dev list. It started with Even Rouault asking which drivers could be dropped from GDAL to ease maintenance, and has widened to cover the struggle independent FOSS developers have to secure income.

It strikes me that if we create an OSGeo community linked in addition to R Consortium, we should be able to link for-profit (and other) users of R-spatial packages and whatever mechanism GDAL/PROJ/GEOS devise for soliciting funding.

[edzer]

Excellent idea!

[tim-salabim]

@rsbivand you're probably referring to this thread ?

[Robinlovelace]

Great to see this rejuventated. Happy to help.

[rsbivand]

Yes, and https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/2021-January/053260.html, which started it.

[Robinlovelace]

Just reading this in more detail. So your suggestion @rsbivand here

It strikes me that if we create an OSGeo community linked in addition to R Consortium, we should be able to link for-profit (and other) users of R-spatial packages and whatever mechanism GDAL/PROJ/GEOS devise for soliciting funding

is to apply to be an OSGeo community, as per the opening post? Reading those threads there's no suggestion that OSGeo has greatly helped securing funding. But if there is still :+1: on the idea I can action to take it forward.

[rsbivand]

I know that OSGeo probably hasn't greatly helped securing funding. The thread touched on difficulties for US corporations to give donations rather than pay invoices. The R Consortium knows how to handle money contributions, better than the R Foundation. It is probably a better channel with knowledge of how to do things. By establishing an OSGeo community we would I think signal that we heard what I think I recall was said by R Consortium, that R-spatial needs a coordination structure, from which flowed the idea of an OSGeo community, a bridge between the two larger fields.

Moving on this could also be fed into the GDAL discussion, indicating that we acknowledge the need to try to do something. There are lots of labs, courses, etc., using R-spatial software building on OSGeo core libraries, and ways of letting them help keep things afloat seems worth trying, even if it is mostly promoting the idea of co-responsibility, if that makes sense.

[Robinlovelace]

I'm drafting an email here: https://hackmd.io/oiak_4C-SAKIgNneT7w3Pw?both

[Robinlovelace]

First draft below (you should be able to edit the doc in the link above):

Application to become an OSGeo Community

send to: incubator@lists.osgeo.org

Dear OSGeo Incubation Committee,

We would like to apply, as the 'R-Spatial' community, to become an OSGeo affiliated organisation.

We are a diverse group with a shared interest in developing free and open tools for the reproducible analysis of geographic data. R is a popular and rapidly growing language for statistical computing and 'data science'. It is alreay part of OSGeo ecosystem: R ships with the OSGeo Live distribution, integrates with established OSGeo projects such as GRASS, and (now slightly dated) tutorials listed on OSGeo's old website.

After a discussion on our GitHub Organisation at github.com/r-spatial, it is clear that closer links could be mutually beneficial. Collaboration is at the heart of open source software and the R community has a long history. The history of R-GRASS bridges, for example, covers more than 10 years and goes in both directions. R interfaces enable OSGeo projects to be accessed, from the command line, to a wide range of people, as illustrated most recently by the qgisprocess package. Perhaps most critically, we as a community rely on the OSGeo projects GDAL and GEOS for data access and geographic operations. We would like to support the ongoing work of these vital components of the wider community that is represented by the OSGeo-affiliated conference series FOSS4G. We also anticipate benefits from being part of the wider OSGeo community and would like to be more active members.

Specifically, we would like to initiate the three-step process need to become a full OSGeo project, as outlined on the Incubation Committee web page:

• We would like to create an OSGeo web page with information about key packages in the 'R-spatial stack'
• We would like to become an OSGeo Community Project
• We would like to enter the incubation program with a view to eventually becoming a full project

All the best,

R-Spatial developers

Should I commit this as an .md document somewhere so we can track changes? Happy to send the email but equally happy for someone else to.

[neteler]

@Robinlovelace An .md document for shared editing/suggesting would be helpful.

[Robinlovelace]

Thanks for the nudge @neteler. I kept meaning to get back to this and you're input, as someone heavily involved in the successful OSGeo project GRASS, is the ideal motivation for me to get on it. More soon...

[Robinlovelace]

Heads up everyone, especially @neteler, @edzer and @rsbivand, here is the letter in editable form:

https://github.com/r-spatial/discuss/blob/84def6bd31099636661f49441806c39225bacf6f/osgeo-email.md

And in an even easier-to-edit form (I tentatively suggest people make edits here as it's quicker): https://hackmd.io/@IGN2QvZIQXKkT2fHo6wX6g/ryoViGWZu

How's this as a plan: give people a week or so to make edits and then send this on Weds next week?

[Robinlovelace]

I think the draft email is coming together, latest version: https://github.com/r-spatial/discuss/blob/ad039518141d654d2323a513dbc0986fc8c5b695/osgeo-email.md

Currently it ends saying "R-Spatial developers:", raising the question, who?

That raises the wider question of what is R-Spatial. Important to define it. I can of 3 broad options: r-/rspatial org packages, all spatial packages or something else. Thoughts? Does r-spatial have a formal 'onboarding' process, how do people submit their packages, do we do peer review? In any case I've created a default narrow definition that is the first option above:

'R-Spatial' can be loosely defined as the ecosystem of code, projects and people using R for working with and adding value to spatial data. A manifestation of the wider R-Spatial community is the friendly, vibrant and diverse range of voices using the #rspatial tag on Twitter. For the purposes of OSGeo supported software projects however, we define R-Spatial packages as those that can be found on at https://github.com/rspatial/ (which includes key packages raster and terra) and https://github.com/r-spatial/ (which includes sf, stars and many other popular packages for working with spatial data).

Thinking: simplicity is good and it's easier to expand definitions than constrain them, so hoping this is future-proof approach but very happy to hear separate suggestions. And what should we write after 'developers' at the end of the message? One idea on that: authors + contributors to the r-spatial/rpatial packages.

[Robinlovelace]

And what should we write after 'developers' at the end of the message?

Another option that I think could be good: anyone who sees this and wants to get involved. Sometimes ad-hoc and works well.

[Robinlovelace]

Assuming everyone's happy for me to send this tomorrow - would be great to get explicit :+1: from @neteler, @edzer and @rsbivand - I think it is worth revisiting the definition of 'r-spatial' I see it as r-spatial/rspatial packages at a minimum, something that could be expanded later down the line. I terms of sign-off, I'd suggest just:

R-Spatial Developers

[tim-salabim]

Sorry for the late feedback. The email sounds good, but I wonder if we wanted to mention RCosnsortium somehow? After all it sparked this whole discussion. But maybe that was already discussed and I missed it... If so, just ignore me :-)

[Robinlovelace]

I wonder if we wanted to mention RCosnsortium somehow?

Good thinking. Will add and also give a chance for others to add their names/comment - may not be until Friday I send it now as a busy next 2 days and don't want to rush it.

[edzer]

Sorry for the late feedback. The email sounds good, but I wonder if we wanted to mention RCosnsortium somehow? After all it sparked this whole discussion. But maybe that was already discussed and I missed it... If so, just ignore me :-)

I don't think that is needed for this application; we can (and should) contact RC again once we are an OSGEO community project.

I made some further edits, also pointing to the list of all (?) packages directly linking to OSGEO libraries. The third bullet point (which I edited before from "project" to "community project") is now unclear, and should be removed if what we want is become a community project, rather than a (full) project. That is what we want, right?

I also added names, as I think a letter only exists if signed by persons; I now added Robin, Roger, me, Tim, and Robert. Please add your name (here, or in the letter) if you want to be in that list.

[edzer]

The letter is btw in https://github.com/r-spatial/discuss/pull/46/files , the link in @Robinlovelace 's message above is an old snapshot.

[eblondel]

Dear all,

jumping into this ticket (since i was watching more that one on "working group" where i've provided a comment here https://github.com/r-spatial/discuss/issues/37#issuecomment-696542706 ) As mentioned there i would like to contribute into the inception of such project, but at this stage it is not clear to me what is the exact scope. Do the r-spatial / rspatial intend to federate beyond its current scope of packages they manage? and involve in the loop other developers? Indeed they are many R package initatives dealing with spatial that are not part of the r-spatial/rspatial Github organizations, and that I believe deserve being under the radar of such OSGeo project proposal, at least through the OSGeo project, even if they are not managed in the rspatial/r-spatial communities that are emphasized in the current proposal. Some packages are managed in other Github organizations, sometimes institutional, or individual accounts, for different reasons, sometimes this is done for legacy reasons. Some packages are not even on Github, but elsewhere. Wouldn't be better to set-up a proper community for this OSGeo project proposal, as umbrella to catch R spatial-related packages (wherever their project homepage is)?

In case you may want to relate explicitely the OSGeo project proposal to R-Consortium, then maybe it would be good to mention which spatial projects (although scattered) already received support from R Consortium; Behind the scene, it could be useful as well to inventory projects that are not accepted with the main reason being that RConsortium argued for a more federated approach for spatial R projects. This would be also a good opportunity to exchange further on the different initatives (where sometimes there are clear/evident technical synergies), so the different R spatial sub-communities / clusters can understand each other, and see what is ongoing, what the development perspectives, what are the user communities behind, etc.

Last point i'd like to add (Edit): IMHO i'm not sure that R Consortium should be mentioned explicitely for OsGEO. It is surely one known funder of R package initiatives, but they are more, including from national institutions and international organizations that do rely on opensource software and more and more on R software, especially for spatial matters. These organizations do have their own community, and some are contributing (through coding and/or funding), they may be interested as well participating to this project, opening more perspectives for strenghtening the R spatial support.

Looking forward to your feedback/thoughs on this,

Best regards, Emmanuel

[edzer]

Dear Emmanuel, this could be one of the things we want to clear up, but maybe not before submitting this proposal. I don't have in mind to restrict the scope to these to github orgs, but to use it as a starting point. I think there are two "levels" of R-OSGeo involvement:

1. packages that directly interact with OSGeo components, e.g. rgrass7, qgisprocesses, sf, terra, rgdal, rgeos etc
2. packages that link to OSGeo components through packages of category 1.

They are different because developers of pkgs of the second category typically consult the developers of the package of the first category in case of troubles. Developers of the first category need to deal with the OSGeo developers directly. As you see (here: only addressing GDAL/PROJ/GEOS) a lot of the packages in category 1 are not under the two github orgs mentioned in the letter. There is no need or intention to exclude anyone now, but I think there is a need for some starting point (which software is involved), and to be identifiable (which people). Please feel free to add your name to the list.

[Robinlovelace]

They are different because developers of pkgs of the second category typically consult the developers of the package of the first category in case of troubles. Developers of the first category need to deal with the OSGeo developers directly. As you see (here: only addressing GDAL/PROJ/GEOS) a lot of the packages in category 1 are not under the two github orgs mentioned in the letter.

Important point and great to link to this list of packages that interact with OSGeo software directly. There are many more packages in category 2 than category 1 and I think it's good to include both in the 'R-spatial' definition.

Looking at the latest version here now https://github.com/Robinlovelace/discuss/blob/patch-1/osgeo-email.md

[Robinlovelace]

The third bullet point (which I edited before from "project" to "community project") is now unclear, and should be removed if what we want is become a community project, rather than a (full) project. That is what we want, right?

Yes I think so @edzer. I've removed that third bullet point now.

[Robinlovelace]

I've added this sentence to the 1st paragraph, as another example of the benefits for OSGeo:

We would like to update and create new OSGeo-affiliated tutorials for using R-Spatial software.

Cannot think of any further changes that need to be made. In case anyone wants to contribute to the final version, which can be edited just by clicking the edit button here https://github.com/Robinlovelace/discuss/blob/patch-1/osgeo-email.md I plan to wait until Monday to send this.

[kadyb]

Great initiative! @Robinlovelace, maybe it would be a good idea to add information on Twitter and call out developers of the most popular spatial packages (e.g. tmap, leaflet, geojson, etc.) in this thread, so they can find out about this initiative as well?

[Robinlovelace]

Great initiative! @Robinlovelace, maybe it would be a good idea to add information on Twitter and call out developers of the most popular spatial packages (e.g. tmap, leaflet, geojson, etc.) in this thread, so they can find out about this initiative as well?

Sent: https://twitter.com/robinlovelace/status/1362755923480043521

Thanks @kadyb good to spread the word and make this open - what's the point in open projects if nobody is looking/contributing?!

[ateucher]

This is fantastic. I left one small comment/suggestion over in the PR :)

[Robinlovelace]

Thanks @ateucher I've made some updates. Please take a look: https://github.com/Robinlovelace/discuss/blob/patch-1/osgeo-email.md

I would like to encourage anyone interested to add their name here - even if you're just an advocate or teacher it would be great to diversify the list of names at the end: https://github.com/Robinlovelace/discuss/blob/patch-1/osgeo-email.md

[eblondel]

@edzer Thanks for your quick reply to my messages, this clarifies a lot 👍 @Robinlovelace you can count me in, and add my name (Emmanuel Blondel), I definitely support this proposal!

[Robinlovelace]

and add my name (Emmanuel Blondel)

Can you edit the file linked to above? The more the merrier, thanks for getting involved.

[ateucher]

I'll be happy to add my name - thanks @Robinlovelace! Your edit looks good to me.

[nickbearman]

Added my name. Also happy to be involved in development of R Spatial training material :-)

[Robinlovelace]

Heads-up @nickbearman, @ateucher, @eblondel and @makosak I finally found all the PRs, for some reason GH didn't alert me. Good news your names are in there now, many thanks!

[mtennekes]

You can add my name as well :-)

[Robinlovelace]

OK just added @mtennekes creator of tmap. Plan to submit this in the hour so if anyone finds typos now's the time to say!

[Robinlovelace]

https://github.com/Robinlovelace/discuss/blob/patch-1/osgeo-email.md

[edzer]

Put comma's between the names.

[edzer]

Great work, BTW!!

[rsbivand]

@Robinlovelace Did the mention of the link to the idea, of being a SIG that R Consortium could coordinate with, get dropped or forgotten? It may be worth mentioning simply to keep it in the frame.

[edzer]

I argued above that it is not needed now/here, but it won't harm either.

[rsbivand]

OK, provided it is on-board as a motivation.

[Robinlovelace]

How is this @rsbivand ?

Many R-Spatial projects have support from the R Consortium, opening the possibility of stronger links between R and OSGeo at an organisational level.

See https://github.com/Robinlovelace/discuss/commit/3e299c5bb63481965f29cb9b3cf1c1246bf4cf1b for the relatively minor change.

[Robinlovelace]

Sent: https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/incubator/2021-February/004299.html

[rsbivand]

Perhaps: "Some key R-Spatial projects have received support from the R Consortium, which requested that these and other R-spatial packages improve their coordination, opening the possibility of stronger links between R and OSGeo at an organisational level."

[robertberryuk]

Added my name and happy to support this initiative - could perhaps contribute to the development of training resources, if needed.