Adrian showed himself to be a level-headed and rational discoursant during the recent kerfuffle.
If Adrian is willing, I'd support a motion to put him in charge of, or at least a member of, some sort of effort to engage with OGC to find out the Best Way Forward for our two organizations. I think Arnulf and I are the current gatekeepers of OGC things, such as it is; I'd of course be happy to continue to help here, and I'm sure Arnulf would too. -mpg -----Original Message----- From: Cameron Shorter <[email protected]> Date: Thursday, May 30, 2013 1:42 PM To: Jeff McKenna <[email protected]> Cc: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OGC liaison memberships >OGC voting organisations typically have 1 vote, (2 people who have >permissions to caste that vote), and each organisation has their own >process for determining that vote. > >I'd suggest that OSGeo should have a committee and set of processes for >determining the vote. One issue we are going to face is getting swamped >with the large number of OGC standards that get voted on. I'd be >interested to hear Adrian's thoughts on this. > >On 31/05/2013 6:35 AM, Jeff McKenna wrote: >> Hi Cameron, >> >> I've been also thinking of OGC voting rights for the OSGeo Foundation. >> I wonder if we should discuss this together during the next Board >> meeting. (how OSGeo can become a voting member) >> >> -jeff >> >> >> >> On 2013-05-30 5:31 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote: >>> +1 from me too. >>> >>> Based on the depth of valuable feedback that OGC received from OSGeo >>> regarding Geoservices REST API, with Adrian being a significant >>> contributor, I believe that we have a good argument to ask for voting >>> rights. (We might not get it, but at least we should ask). >>> >>> >>> >>> On 31/05/2013 4:35 AM, Adrian Custer wrote: >>>> On 5/30/13 2:54 PM, Frank Warmerdam wrote: >>>>> Adrian, >>>>> >>>>> According to http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OGC_membership we have open >>>>> slots. >>>>> It seems that Arnulf and Michael can authorize it. There are some >>>>> fairly >>>>> restrictive conditions on OGC individual memberships which is what >>>>> this is. >>>>> You should confirm you are going to fit. >>>>> >>>>> http://www.opengeospatial.org/ogc/join/level/individual >>>> Indeed that is my current status: the 'you can do all the work but >>>> can't vote' level of membership. >>>> >>>>> It isn't clear that these memberships imply you exactly speak for >>>>>OSGeo >>>>> though you can certainly give your affiliation as OSGeo. >>>> Right. I could only 'speak for OSGeo' on any particular topic when, >>>> after discussion, OSGeo has formulated one, or probably several, >>>> positions on any issues. In general I would speak as 'one of the horde >>>> of free software actors'. >>>> >>>>> It would be wonderful to use this mechanism to give you standing at >>>>> OGC as >>>>> I know you will make good use of it. >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Frank >>>> ~adrian >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Adrian Custer <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hey all, >>>>>> >>>>>> As I remember it, OSGeo has been granted a number of liaison >>>>>> memberships >>>>>> (six?) from the OGC. Are they all being used? If not, what would be >>>>>>the >>>>>> process to obtain one? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> In past years, I have been reluctant to officially represent OSGeo >>>>>> and so >>>>>> have paid for a membership on my own. Nonetheless, I have been >>>>>> pushing the >>>>>> OGC on openness, the consideration of free software, and issues >>>>>>arising >>>>>> from the 'OSGeo point of view' ever since I started participating at >>>>>> the >>>>>> OGC. I have also been acting unofficially as a bridge between the >>>>>>two >>>>>> organizations (with the good and bad that comes from that such as, >>>>>> in the >>>>>> last few days, being unable to announce the end of the 'GeoServices >>>>>> REST' >>>>>> debacle). Now I am considering making this work and my association >>>>>> between >>>>>> the two organizations more formal. >>>>>> >>>>>> Therefore, if you all are willing, and if a membership were >>>>>> available, I >>>>>> would like to take this on as a formal role and represent all of you >>>>>> at the >>>>>> OGC. It would mean I would show up to meetings and sign my >>>>>> authorship of >>>>>> whatever documents with the affiliation 'OSGeo'. In the future, I >>>>>>also >>>>>> would plan to lobby the OGC to grant OSGeo a formal vote in the >>>>>> proceedings >>>>>> of the technical committee. That will be hard to obtain since we >>>>>> will not >>>>>> be pitching in the mega-cash that the OGC needs to sustain their >>>>>>way of >>>>>> operating; however, it might be possible someday, especially if we >>>>>> start >>>>>> contributing effectively to their work. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sincerely, >>>>>> Adrian Custer >>>>>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss > > >-- >Cameron Shorter >Geospatial Solutions Manager >Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050 >Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254 > >Think Globally, Fix Locally >Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source >http://www.lisasoft.com > >_______________________________________________ >Discuss mailing list >[email protected] >http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
