All,
As a long-time Unidata customer/collaborator, former Users Committee member and
fellow De Sousa award winner, I feel the need to get involved in this
discussion, though I am not quite sure how to reply to this series.
Like others who have chimed in, I am concerned that having this discussion over
email could lead to misunderstandings (as it seems already to have with the
back and forth with Stonie) and unproductive debate.
I do agree with many of the points that Gilbert, Henry and Bill have made
regarding analysis software, concerns about upcoming NOAAPort data channel
changes, communication about changes, etc, so not I'm not going to rehash those
here. Although some of the changes are beyond Unidata (e.g. Moving from gempak
to AWIPS - that was based on an NWS decision)
I also have to say that I think that some of the decisions/directions that
Unidata has been at the forefront of do make sense. When I was on the Users
committee (2015-2018) one of the big discussions was moving the data analysis
closer to where the data lives, since the data is getting so much larger and
diverse. Does it really make sense to download the entire 0.25 degree GFS
forecast out to 384 hours when all you want to plot is a 500 hPa vorticity map?
Or even a dozen maps. Having all of the data live on a remote site (or sites)
like a THREDDS server really makes sense
I will say that I was rather stunned that the person hired to take over many of
Tom Yoksas' duties when he retired was one of the people being let go in this
latest series of layoffs. That seems like an important connection with the
Unidata community that has now been lost. I also was surprised that the
notification to the community of said layoffs came from the employee himself,
and not from Unidata leadership. The silence from the leadership at Unidata
regarding that, as well as this current discussion is a bit unnerving.
Pete Pokrandt - System Engineer IV
UW-Madison Dept of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences
608-262-3086 - poker@xxxxxxxxxxxx
________________________________
From: noaaport <noaaport-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Mike Zuranski
<zuranski.wx@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2024 10:35 AM
To: mcidas-x@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mcidas-x@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; NOAAPORT
<noaaport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; conduit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <conduit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Stonie Cooper <cooper@xxxxxxxx>; Gallus, William A [EAC]
<wgallus@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [noaaport] [conduit] [External] Re: [mcidas-x] Concerns about the
future of UNIDATA
Howdy everyone,
I intend to stay on the sidelines for this exchange as it doesn't feel entirely
appropriate for me to jump in. I'm chiming in now to only say two things with
the intent being clarification & transparency:
First, I believe Stonie was referring to the LDM topics exclusively and was not
representing the entire UPC, all staff nor all projects. I would avoid
applying his words to other parts of Unidata outside the LDM.
Second, in the last staff meeting I was present for our director had committed
to addressing these concerns to the community. He did not state what would be
addressed or when this messaging would be sent out, but he stated that he would
write something. I'm disappointed to see that has not yet happened. Unidata
staff do not have the answers as far as I know, as of when I left we had many
of these same questions ourselves. I remain hopeful that our director will
inform us what happened, how and why, as well as plans for Unidata moving
forward. I feel confident in saying these are questions we all have.
Best,
-Mike
On Thu, Aug 8, 2024 at 10:16 AM Gallus, William A [EAC] via conduit
<conduit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:conduit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
I was going to avoid getting involved in this discussion since it seemed to
turn toxic almost immediately but Henry's mention that there are likely others
not willing to speak up motivated me to say something. At ISU, the two of us
who teach courses that have regularly used Unidata products in the past agree
wholeheartedly with Gilbert. If I knew more python, and my colleague had more
time (since he does know python well), we would have abandoned traditional
Unidata products by now, and would simply have our students run python codes to
generate the maps needed for our weekly labs, instead of using Unidata products
since we feel abandoned by them (I realize Unidata is responsible for MetPy and
we are thankful for that, but the single best thing Unidata could have been
doing for us in recent years was making very simple-to-use python codes
available that we could just give to the students to do things like compute
frontogenesis, create isentropic cross-sections, vertical cross-sections of EPV
for CSI evaluation, etc (where the students would simply have to change maybe
the link to a dataset, and perhaps contour intervals or levels/layers). AWIPS2
never became a good option for those of us with decades of great cases archived
in gempak format (boy how I wish there was an easy way to turn those archived
datasets into things AWIPS2 could ingest so that we could still have our
students use those cases for labs – assuming AWIPS2 would actually run well on
our computers). Both of us tried over the years to learn to like IDV and
constantly found it to be terrible, and our students did not like the little
bit of dabbling we did with it. Thus, we continue to hang on by a thread,
using garp and gempak, and hoping desperately they still work after every
update/upgrade to our systems, while constantly talking about how we need to
find some way to get away from all of that and just have students use python.
I have talked to other profs who teach synoptic courses and it seems like the
use of python in labs is really growing, to replace all the programs we used to
associate with Unidata.
In any case, I echo what Henry said and was stunned at the harshness of the
replies to Gilbert's email. We at ISU agree with Gilbert and feel very sad and
abandoned, and these feelings have been developing for many years now. I
served on both the Unidata Users Committee and Strategic Advisory Committees in
the past, chairing them at times, and don't recall seeing such an angry and
unhelpful reply ever in my years on those committees, when we in the community
would express concerns and share our needs with Unidata staff. I'm not sure
what the root of the problem is – I just know there is a problem because I am
in the trenches teaching 2 required lab courses every year that have depended
on traditional Unidata software every week.
Bill
________________________________
From: conduit
<conduit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:conduit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> on
behalf of Henry Luker via conduit
<conduit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:conduit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Sent: Wednesday, August 7, 2024 7:31 PM
To: Stonie Cooper <cooper@xxxxxxxx<mailto:cooper@xxxxxxxx>>
Cc: mcidas-x@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mcidas-x@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<mcidas-x@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mcidas-x@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>; NOAAPORT
<noaaport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:noaaport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>;
mcidas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mcidas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<mcidas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mcidas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>;
conduit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:conduit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<conduit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:conduit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>;
ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: Re: [conduit] [noaaport] [External] Re: [mcidas-x] Concerns about the
future of UNIDATA
I'm a little disheartened, to say the least, at the responses to this
conversation thus far. I believe that Gilbert raised completely valid concerns
and constructive criticism in a professional manner, that were neither personal
nor directed at any individual in particular. Speaking to his concerns, I can
attest that these are shared by myself personally, and at least a few others as
well (who may not be as willing to speak up, especially after seeing how it is
being received now!). The responses received seem defensive, hostile, and
apprehensive to an active and long-term member of the UNIDATA community. I
would hope that as professionals we would be able to have a more open and
honest conversation, that frankly goes beyond "Developers prerogative."
Ultimately, it all leads me to wonder whether the community is actually valued
or not at UNIDATA, beyond saying as such in the mission statement.
I am a fairly new member to the community. When I first arrived, I found that
it was welcoming, transparent, and community-based. Even as someone who was
learning tools like LDM for the first time, I appreciated the open-source,
community-driven, and patient nature exhibited. I am not sure if I could say
the same now. At minimum, it would be nice to have a bit more transparency
about the future of the projects and decisions that are being made. I don't
understand the reasoning for making things walled off all the sudden, nor
understand why it can't at least be explained beyond "it's my way or the
highway." We may not agree, but at least we would have some insight as to what
is going on and don't have to be in this position in the first place.
Henry
On Wed, Aug 7, 2024 at 4:58 PM Stonie Cooper
<cooper@xxxxxxxx<mailto:cooper@xxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Developers prerogative.
Stonie Cooper
Software Engineer III
NSF Unidata Program Center
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
I acknowledge that the land I live and work on is the traditional home of The
Chahiksichahiks (Pawnee), The Umoⁿhoⁿ (Omaha), and The Jiwere (Otoe).
On Wed, Aug 7, 2024 at 4:54 PM Sebenste, Gilbert
<sebensteg@xxxxxxx<mailto:sebensteg@xxxxxxx>> wrote:
Stonie,
I am not lobbing grenades at those in the trenches. I’m just trying to find out
what is going on in the trenches…and I would like to know the reasons why.
Gilbert
Gilbert Sebenste
Meteorology Support Analyst
[cid:ii_1913292abae4cff311]
From: Stonie Cooper <cooper@xxxxxxxx<mailto:cooper@xxxxxxxx>>
Sent: Wednesday, August 7, 2024 4:51 PM
To: Sebenste, Gilbert <sebensteg@xxxxxxx<mailto:sebensteg@xxxxxxx>>
Cc: ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
mcidas-x@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mcidas-x@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; NOAAPORT
<noaaport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:noaaport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>;
mcidas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mcidas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
conduit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:conduit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [External] Re: [mcidas-x] Concerns about the future of UNIDATA
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of COD’s system. Do not click
links, open attachments, or respond with sensitive information unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Development in LDM continues, but not in github. That is for a lot of reasons,
but lobbing grenades at those still in the trenches will get you next to
nowhere.
Stonie Cooper, PhD
Software Engineer III
NSF Unidata Program Center
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
I acknowledge that the land I live and work on is the traditional home of The
Chahiksichahiks (Pawnee), The Umoⁿhoⁿ (Omaha), and The Jiwere (Otoe).
On Wed, Aug 7, 2024 at 4:04 PM Sebenste, Gilbert
<sebensteg@xxxxxxx<mailto:sebensteg@xxxxxxx>> wrote:
Good day everyone,
With the recent loss of 3 extremely valuable UNIDATA staff members, I wanted to
inquire UNIDATA concerning several disturbing trends that I have been seeing
with the organization. And quite frankly, what I discovered is disconcerting.
Over the past several years, UNIDATA has been moving away from what it was
funded to do, namely: provide weather data, software, and support to the
University community for teaching, and also for research:
“Unidata is a diverse community of education and research institutions with the
common goal of sharing geoscience data and the tools to access and visualize
that data.” –
https://www.unidata.ucar.edu/about<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.unidata.ucar.edu/about__;!!Mak6IKo!PEuQGk7ZAZD2oLuaKHRmjb5oa0epeADGmIF-WByYpti35ev5u_VV3gI1aLR66dFxerRFZoRdTLAUAIT_4H9y9g$>
With this stated goal, excellent software packages used to support the
educational and research communities have either been retired. or development
has stopped…with minimal input from the user community. These software packages
include GEMPAK, McIDAS, LDM (which hasn’t been touched on GitHub since Steve
Emmerson retired), as well as others. In fact, McIDAS was sunset without any
announcement or input from universities.
When I brought these concerns to the Unidata User Committee chair, Victor
Gensini, I found out that he had resigned nearly a month ago. This, again, was
done without any announcement to the community. The User’s Committee is much
more than an advisory board; it is one of shared governance. And the decisions
made over the past several years have now culminated in an utter lack of
transparency with the recent loss of staff. In a scientific community, the
governing process must involve transparency to the highest extent possible to
maintain integrity of the staff, community, services they provide, data, and
success for end users.
This is already starting to have a profoundly negative effect at the College of
DuPage, which prompted me to write this. Even though we are a community
college, we believe in UNIDATA’s stated vision and have shared our data via our
website to all. Our setup here shares the weather data as much as we are able.
Without UNIDATA’s McIDAS, GEMPAK, WXP and other software packages, we will not
be able to share this data with others; additionally, we will not be able to
teach the next generation of students with adequate software tools in a time
where interest in the atmospheric sciences is about to peak. As a result, we
have started to migrate towards commercial solutions to fill in the gaps. In
the first 20 years of UNIDATA, that would be unthinkable.
What is being supported? IDV is being built on a dying platform (Java), with
apparently very few users, and one of the two AWIPS developers was one of the
three people let go. What is left? Two of these staff members were the future
of UNIDATA, and the other took care of critical systems and engagement with
underserved communities. Who is doing that now? Nobody has answered these
questions.
Complete transparency has been and continues to be absolutely critical to the
success that highlighted UNIDATA’s efforts over many years. These decisions
have been made in darkness. Where leadership has been required, silence has
occurred. It should not have been left to a terminated employee to make that
announcement on his own free will.
I am saying this with all sincerity because I believe that UNIDATA is going
off-mission. I am speaking out like this because I am gravely concerned that
UNIDATA has lost it’s way, delving into areas beyond what it was supposed to
be, while failing to maintain and flourish what it’s mission statement demands.
The end result has been the loss of critical software and support that we need,
as an educational institution. And let’s be blunt here: if the
https://weather.cod.edu<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://weather.cod.edu/__;!!Mak6IKo!PEuQGk7ZAZD2oLuaKHRmjb5oa0epeADGmIF-WByYpti35ev5u_VV3gI1aLR66dFxerRFZoRdTLAUAIRkkK5yvQ$>
site went down, a lot of Universities who use us would be in trouble. We know,
because we see the number of “hits” from them in our web logs. And, if the LDM
isn’t maintained, especially with major NOAAport/SBN feed changes on the
horizon, the very backbone of the NWS data feed is in jeopardy. If McIDAS isn’t
maintained, our satellite imagery goes away. And despite requests for Canadian
radar data and other datasets that can be helpful (several Canadian radars
cover portions of the border states reasonably well), not a yes or a no has
been spoken to me.
UNIDATA, as a DeSouza award winner, I beg that you turn back to what made you
great: tried and true, as well as new software…data and software for all of us,
and unquestionable, excellent support.
With respect,
Gilbert Sebenste
Meteorology Support Analyst
[cid:ii_1913292abae4cff311]
_______________________________________________
NOTE: All exchanges posted to Unidata maintained email lists are
recorded in the Unidata inquiry tracking system and made publicly
available through the web. Users who post to any of the lists we
maintain are reminded to remove any personal information that they
do not want to be made public.
mcidas-x mailing list
mcidas-x@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:mcidas-x@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
For list information or to unsubscribe, visit:
https://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/__;!!Mak6IKo!PEuQGk7ZAZD2oLuaKHRmjb5oa0epeADGmIF-WByYpti35ev5u_VV3gI1aLR66dFxerRFZoRdTLAUAIS5JzDyLg$>
_______________________________________________
NOTE: All exchanges posted to Unidata maintained email lists are
recorded in the Unidata inquiry tracking system and made publicly
available through the web. Users who post to any of the lists we
maintain are reminded to remove any personal information that they
do not want to be made public.
noaaport mailing list
noaaport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:noaaport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
For list information or to unsubscribe, visit:
https://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/__;!!Mak6IKo!PEuQGk7ZAZD2oLuaKHRmjb5oa0epeADGmIF-WByYpti35ev5u_VV3gI1aLR66dFxerRFZoRdTLAUAIS5JzDyLg$>
_______________________________________________
NOTE: All exchanges posted to Unidata maintained email lists are
recorded in the Unidata inquiry tracking system and made publicly
available through the web. Users who post to any of the lists we
maintain are reminded to remove any personal information that they
do not want to be made public.
conduit mailing list
conduit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:conduit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
For list information or to unsubscribe, visit:
https://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/__;!!Mak6IKo!PEuQGk7ZAZD2oLuaKHRmjb5oa0epeADGmIF-WByYpti35ev5u_VV3gI1aLR66dFxerRFZoRdTLAUAIS5JzDyLg$>
--
- Mike Zuranski
