All,
How would the separation of projects occur between those in OSGeo
already vs those wanting to be LocationTech certified as well. I
would imagine that some would not feel like they need to be certified
by both. What happens in this case?
Also, what are the longer term differences between LocationTech and
OSGeo with regard to keeping code legally free of proprietary code,
what's the followup on the Location tech side? I'm more in tune with
OSGeo processes BTW.
Bobb
*From:*[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Jachym Cepicky
*Sent:* Monday, September 15, 2014 4:59 AM
*To:* Jody Garnett
*Cc:* OSGeo Discussions; Daniel Morissette
*Subject:* Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
What about speeding OSGeo incubation in a way, that projects, who made
it through locationtech, would have to work only at the differences
between both incubations, afaik the community aspect and maybe
something else, in order to make it to OSGeo project? It would be more
easy for them to make it through OSGeo incubation, things would be
speeding up a bit
I'm I completely wrong?
Jachym
Send from cellphone
--
Jachym Cepicky
e-mail: jachym.cepicky gmail com
URL: http://les-ejk.cz
GPG: http://les-ejk.cz/pgp/JachymCepicky.pgp
Give your code freedom with PyWPS -http://pywps.wald.intevation.org
On Sep 15, 2014 7:55 AM, "Jody Garnett" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Good questions/discussion:
Going to chime in as I enjoy both working with OSGeo incubation and
LocationTech. I am a couple timezones west of Daniel but sleep is on
the horizon.
TLDR: I am not 100% positive of either organisation, which is why I am
trying to make them better.
--
Jody Garnett
On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Massimiliano Cannata
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
As you said the final goal is the same: open source Geospatial
software affirmation. And this is the best thing I can wish to all of us.
Agreed, and I was very heartened by aspects of foss4g this year.
Nevertheless what I just have not clear is: what location teach do
differently with respect to osgeo?
A lot of questions :) The two organisations share the same goals, but
have different talents with respect to outreach.
I am going to try and do a single Pro/Con for each organisation just
so you can see how they differ. I suspect this is a better
conversation over beer or coffee since I cannot tell what kind of
differences you are interested in?
OSGeo Incubation
Pro: OSGeo incubation has the advantage of being less formal, and thus
able to adapt to the needs of the projects in incubation today. This
message gets lots repeatedly, which makes me a bit sad. I usually pick
on my own projects, but perhaps the pycsw crew would not mind being
used as an example. We have an "checklist" item about user / developer
interaction, with an example provided of user list collaboration
around releases. This example is dated and does not fit with an
amazing aspect of the pycsw story - pycsw have great downstream
projects fulfilling this role (risk mitigation around release based on
bug reports, testing, collaboration). OSGeo incubation has the
flexibility to recognise this value ... and get on with life.
Con: OSGeo incubation has a look but don't touch attitude - we like to
leave projects as we found them and not disturb the way each projects
is already functioning. This is great "low impact" approach for when
we were taking on fully-fored projects like MapServer, MapGuide and
PostGIS. What could possibly be the drawback? We are not in position
to offer much guidance to organisations that are new to open source
struggling to know where to start.
Contrast: We are great at reviewing project viability to try and
protect OSGeo users from adopting projects that have gone stale.
LocationTech Incubation
Pro: LocationTech is a working group in an already established
Software Foundation. They have a long history of teaching new projects
how to do OpenSource. Many of the conventions we work with in our open
source projects (voting +1 to accept a new committer on a project)
have been automated into a developer portal. This structure can help
those new to open source feel confidence they are doing it right.
Cons: The workload associated with checking License/Headers is both
harder and easier then OSGeo. There are staff to do the checking, but
you need to submit each thing you depend on - even down to the build
tools used to compile, build diagrams or generate docs. While I can
kind of respect this (protecting potential developers from needing to
purchase tools) was not prepared for the workload.
Contrast: Eclipse incubation does not say much about if a project is
stale.
does it somehow overlap with incubation or not? What are the
distinctive features?
There is an overlap, but differences:
* A project graduating out of OSGeo ...would have to do a formal IP
check to graduate out of LocationTech. There is paid staff to do the
work, but it is still a lot of work to submit all the code. I think
there is like a TM check and other stuff. Lots of work, with some
assistance on offer.
* A project graduating out of LocationTech ... would have to do
organisation viability, documentation checks, user/developer
collaboration and similar. Soft concerns but hard to do.
They also have a similar issue: projects are (quite rightly) more
focused on the next release and any publicity .. then actually
completing incubation.
Personally I wonder why some of the most eminent person of osgeo
(like you) decided to work into location teach? Don't
misunderstood me, I'm not judging nor criticizing, I'd just like
to understand opportunities or aspect or services not found in
osgeo and that experts and leaders found there.
When the talks go up, skip to the end of the LocationTech projects you
can see leads from several projects answer your question.
For me personally the motivation is the same: foster new projects as
the best way of fulfilling our OSGeo mandate / LocationTech charter.
For me as uDig project lead:
a) The uDig project always wanted to join Eclipse: since it is built
with Eclipse "Rich Client Platform (RCP)" the best way to attract new
RCP developers is to take uDig closer to where the developers are.
b) Is in need of a new home as Refractions does not appear active
Sorry in advance for my eventual ignorance, but I think this
would help people better understand the discussion and the future
of osgeo.
Thanks for the questions Maxi. If you want a front row seat you could
always talk to the OSGeo Board about being the Guest on the
LocationTech meetings. This position was created help with
communication, and I guess this email thread indicates a need.
The nice thing is that all these software organisations are here to
help (OSGeo, Eclipse Foundation, Apache Foundation, Free Software
Foundation, Linux Foundation). This ability to play well with others
is something I respect about OSGeo. We are not worried about our
projects being hosted on GitHub, or Marble GIS working with KDE
Foundation.
--
Jody
PS. I wrote a blog post
<http://www.lisasoft.com/blog/programming-public-osgeo-and-locationtech> of
some of my culture shock when first starting with LocationTech. I have
learned a bit since then so take that link with a grain of salt.
PPS. I volunteered to help with foss4g-na, no idea what I am in for,
but if you have any ideas/suggestions please send them to me.
Maxi
Il 14-set-2014 17:05 "Daniel Morissette" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> ha scritto:
FWIW I'm happy to hear that there was such a face to face
discussion. I believe that open communication on the issues
will be the best way to address the fears and find ways to
move forward in the best interest of the overall worldwide
community of people, businesses, institutions, etc who have a
common interest in seeing free and open source geospatial
software strive.
Keep in mind that we all come to this model of software
development for different reasons (business, academic,
philosophical, hobby, etc.), but in the end we're all working
towards a similar objective, so there is no fear to be had,
just different means of reaching a common objective, and since
the result of everybody's actions is better free/open source
software, everybody will benefit in the end.
Not sure if I was able to relay my thoughts properly... maybe
I need a bit more sleep.
Cheers all
Daniel
On 14-09-14 10:25 AM, Jachym Cepicky wrote:
Guys,
as long as I understand it: "some members of the community"
are scared
of LocationTech "taking over" whatever (FOSS4G conference, OSGeo
projects and community). This can be based on real action,
taken on
either site, unofficial statement, misunderstandings or personal
dislikes.
Yesterday, we had short (about 2hours) face 2 face discussion with
Andrew here in PDX (me, Vasile, Jeff and Gerald) and I personally
believe, that it is not in interest of LocationTech to "crush"
OSGeo
or FOSS4G conference. It was clearly stated, that LocationTech
would
like to contribute to FOSS4G and make it to better conference,
regarding (again) "some remarks" of "some members of the
community"
(including myself), that the way, FOSS4G is organised, does not
necessary meet some of the community aspects, we would like to
stress.
I would like to note, that the discussion was very open on
both sides,
still calm and productive.
"To contribute" of course means "to work" and LocationTech is
anything
but volunteer driven organisation. It has been stated, that
FOSS4G-NA
next year will be organised primarily by LocationTech, but
OSGeo willl
be represented clearly and (so to say) loudly.
This could be one of the firsts steps towards closer cooperation
between LocationTech and OSGeo.
Everybody is aware, that on some points, LocationTech is not that
good, as OSGeo currently is. OSGeo is certainly failing in other
things. Looking for ways, how to strengthen common strengths and
weaken our weaknesses should have "non-zero-sum" effect.
We, as OSGeo shall later evaluate, whether the price for
helping us
LocationTech with conferences (regardless if on regional or global
level), was too hight or quite ok. In case of disagreement, we
shall
try to find solution for the next time.
In the worst case, we find out, that cooperation is not
possible and
everybody can go it's way than.
I hope, you get my point(s) and that I did not misinterpreted
anything, what was said.
Thank you
Jachym
--
Daniel Morissette
T: +1 418-696-5056 #201 <tel:%2B1%20418-696-5056%20%23201>
http://www.mapgears.com/
Provider of Professional MapServer Support since 2000
