Conversation
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Co-authored-by: David Perez-Suarez <d.perez-suarez@ucl.ac.uk>
mxochicale
left a comment
mxochicale
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi David and all, great start!
I have added a few comments. Happy to read it again.
Thanks, Miguel
|
I think this should be reviewed and merged to
I disagree with this way of working. |
Co-authored-by: Sam Cunliffe <samcunliffe@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Sam Cunliffe <samcunliffe@users.noreply.github.com>
jonc125
left a comment
jonc125
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Various thoughts from me on an initial read-through, and some proof reading.
ospo/business-case.md
Outdated
|
|
||
|
|
||
| *mission statement* | ||
| > You’ll need to define your project vision, goals and objectives. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We also need to reflect the viewpoint of people like Will Greenly here, not just the research perspective.
Co-authored-by: Jonathan Cooper <github.com@jonc.me.uk>
adamltyson
left a comment
adamltyson
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good. The only thing that seems missing to me is some kind of overarching strong argument to senior leadership at UCL who may not know/care about software. I think their could be an emphasis on "other organisations are doing this, don't want to get left behind", "maintaining our leadership position within UK academia", "OSS is the future" etc.
jonc125
left a comment
jonc125
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've run out of time to continue today, but have tried to give a thorough proof-read to make this look professional for the committee.
jonc125
left a comment
jonc125
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've run out of time to continue today, but have tried to give a thorough proof-read to make this look professional for the committee.
thompson318
left a comment
thompson318
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good. Some comments.
ospo/business-case.md
Outdated
| Our university as many institutions and organisations around the globe depends on Open Source, | ||
| whether it's software, hardware, data or other resources as research and educational outputs. | ||
| Open source software is everywhere and it has a huge economic impact. | ||
| The [State of Open Source paper][sospaper], shows that 96% of all software included open source software. | ||
| Moreover, a [study from the Harvard Business School][harvard-oss] has shown recently that open source software generated $8.8 trillion of value and production costs are reduced a factor of 3.5. | ||
| Other open source "products" haven't been under such a detailed analysis yet, however, from the point of view of an university, | ||
| they are still very important, for example for the Open Science reproducibility mission as well as for the creation of Open Educational resources. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This bit talks about different types of open source (open data, open science) etc. Some of which is already covered by UCL Office for Open Science and Scholarship. But the rest of the document seems to be explicitly about open source software. Should we make it clearer here that the OPSO is all about open source software?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Then I have to do a better work in the text below. It's not intended to be open source software, but everything related to open source (whether it's software, data, hardware, ...).
jonc125
left a comment
jonc125
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Some more suggestions for the parts I didn't get to earlier!
Co-authored-by: Jonathan Cooper <github.com@jonc.me.uk> Co-authored-by: Adam Tyson <code@adamltyson.com>
niksirbi
left a comment
niksirbi
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Apologies for the (very) late review.
I'll only make 1 point (apologies if it's been made already and I've missed it).
There doesn't seem to be 100% consistency on the preferred spelling of the term "open source" throughout the document.
It appears as "open source" in most cases, but there are a few "Open Source" and "open-source" mixed in.
My personal preference would be for "open-source" when used as an adjective (e.g. "open-source practices", "open-source projects") and "Open Source" when used as a noun (e.g. referring to the movement as a whole). I'm aware of this preference being in conflict the name of the office itself.
Anyway, internal consistency is far more important than my preference here, so I'd recommend going though a round of Ctrl+F to harmonise all occurrences of the term.
If there is a logic to the various spellings, it may be worth stating it in a footnote.
@niksirbi suggestion of using - "open-source" when used as an adjective (e.g. "open-source practices", "open-source projects") and - "Open Source" when used as a noun (e.g. referring to the movement as a whole). Co-authored-by: Niko Sirmpilatze <niko.sirbiladze@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Stephen Thompson <s.thompson@ucl.ac.uk> Co-authored-by: Jonathan Cooper <github.com@jonc.me.uk> Co-authored-by: Adam Tyson <code@adamltyson.com> Co-authored-by: Miguel Xochicale <m.xochicale@ucl.ac.uk>
7 participants
Draft completed. Now to get reviews.
The rendered version can be seen visiting the file itself