incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Benson Margulies <>
Subject Re: launch trajectories
Date Tue, 05 Jul 2011 13:55:27 GMT
No secret here. It's OpenNLP.

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Ross Gardler <> wrote:
> On 5 July 2011 14:07, Benson Margulies <> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
>> <> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Upayavira <> wrote:
>>>> ...If a project, during an 18 month incubation, cannot draw in new blood,
>>>> how can we believe that it will do so as a TLP?
>>>> Marketing of the project, getting it known, getting people using it
>>>> enough so as to draw in new blood, is clearly a part of the incubation
>>>> process....
>>> I tend to agree, and maybe also lowering the bar for new committers (I
>>> have no idea if that's a problem in your podling).
>> At the risk of getting shoes thrown at my by my fellow mentors ...
>> I know something about the field of endeavour of this podling --
>> that's why I volunteered. I think that it is a very interesting
>> question as to how many qualified, interested, potential committers
>> are out there. Much of the work in the field is academic, and
>> professors tend to keep their <del>slave labor</del> graduate students
>> otherwise occupied. I'd be happy to be proved wrong, but, in a sense,
>> that's the question posed by this podling: who's out there?
>> Ironically, I might be writing a proposal this week for funding to
>> assign people of mine to work on it, but there's no telling where that
>> will go.
> I have plenty of experience of projects born inthe academic space. I
> would suggest that if the seven committers are all academic related
> then more caution is required than if they are from 3 or more
> independent commercial organisations. The problem is that once the
> funded for a given project has finished the academics are no longer
> interested and there is nobody to transition to a new development
> team.
> It can, of course, be argued that this is also true of companies
> investing in projects. They might pull the plug at any time. However,
> typically collaborating academics are all drawing from the same pot.
> They might look independent of one another, but the common funding
> makes them all prone to disappear at the same time.
> A further problem is that in the case of academic projects the driving
> force is, very often, not interested in the software as an output.
> They are interested in the research questions being addressed. Often
> longevity of the software is not important to their career paths.
> Consequently community development work is often lacking.
> These problems are not insurmountable nor are my observations always
> true. We do have projects that have their roots in academic circles,
> but I believe such projects need more active community development
> work. In summary I would suggest that caution be observed.
> Can you identify the project (offlist if you prefer). I'd like to take
> a quick look to see if I am aware of any overlaps in my network).
> Ross
>>> -Bertrand
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> --
> Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
> Programme Leader (Open Development)
> OpenDirective
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message