[Osmf-talk] Seeking feedback and interest in the OSMF Engineering Working Group

john whelan jwhelan0112 at gmail.com
Mon Jul 19 15:55:43 UTC 2021

I would agree a metrics driven approach is rarely the best approach.  It's
too simple and sometimes things take time to gel.

Cheerio John

On Mon, Jul 19, 2021, 11:44 Andy Allan <gravitystorm at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 at 23:29, Michal Migurski <mike at teczno.com> wrote:
> > Our software projects so far have not gained contributors and
> maintainers over time, and in fact the opposite has happened. iD no longer
> has Bryan or Quincy contributing to its development. The team behind the
> API & website has been reduced to you and Tom for many years. We are lucky
> to have had dedicated and skilled people like yourself, but the board has
> not chosen to prioritize or support a conducive environment for growing the
> community of engineers. This story has been consistent over the past five
> years and should be cause for alarm for the majority of community members
> who prioritized stability in the recent survey.
> I feel I should point out that I wasn't even a maintainer 5 years ago!
> So perhaps the story is the same, but the actual situation does
> change, and so I reiterate my request that you double-check with the
> people involved before drawing any more conclusions based on incorrect
> data.
> Another example is including the JOSM pull request data in your
> analysis, despite them not using github for development! That would
> skew your analysis somewhat. Again, it's something that could easily
> have been caught before you published your charts and targets.
> > Instead I am proposing a way for the board to set a goal for the EWG
> using readily-available public data. We’ll know the working group is
> successful when we see a movement in the contribution and maintenance
> patterns on core repos.
> Having worked in various metrics-driven organisations, I'm deeply
> cautious about the choosing of targets. And I'm still deeply skeptical
> of these "contribution and maintenance patterns" that you have chosen.
> If the board starts measuring progress on those charts and your stated
> goals, then there are two simple ways we can "improve" those outcomes
> - simply close community pull requests immediately, and arbitrarily
> decline merging maintainer PRs. That's a step backwards for everyone
> involved, but would meet those defined goals.
> So my hope is that you set those charts and goals aside, and
> reconsider your approach.
> Thanks,
> Andy
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20210719/0f41b776/attachment.htm>

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list