RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Return on Equity

2007-08-30 Thread Gavin Fleming
On Jo's last point re funding travel expenses, this would be a huge
benefit for getting deserving delegates who don't have the means to Cape
Town next year and other conferences in future. Perhaps a merit- and
means- based application process could be applied. 

Gavin


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jo Walsh
Sent: 30 August 2007 12:20 AM
To: OSGeo Discussions
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Return on Equity

dear Howard, thanks for your email which has been along with its
responses very thought-provoking,

On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 10:18:36PM -0700, Dave Patton wrote:
 Howard Butler wrote:
 Most of OSGeo's measurable successes to date have been volunteer 
 efforts, not primarily financially-backed ones.  The OSGeo Journal 
 effort, Google Summer of Code administration, the Geodata committee's

 efforts, and even much of our system administration to keep the
lights 
 on for developer tools 

Well, these are quite different kinds of efforts. The Journal has come
together because of Tyler's time invested in it, so it is more or less 
direct financial backing from OSGeo. The SoC programme, look forward 
to hear more about the eventual experiences of, but that came about in
the first place because of direct Google financial support to students.

The Geodata committee's efforts have been more like what you describe
about software projects coming together - a byproduct of a set of
interconnected people each scratching their own itches. But being more
loose collaboration than planned action it is a bit impenetrable to
those outside the immediate loop, i think. And geodata and systems
administration have overlapped quite a bit, as people get shanghaied
into helping with different problems ;) 

But keeping the lights on, and creating new things, are quite
different. One burns out on doing administrative / organising things
and i wish there were a way that could be automated and/or shared. 
The structure we have now with one Committee Chair per committee,
one gets into overcommitment/guilt and superfluous soul-searching.

 benefactor as we do now.  We're almost two years down the road into 
 bootstrapping, and our majority benefactor situation has budged very 
 little.  As far as I know, our only significant incoming sponsorship 
 dollars beyond Autodesk are the targeted development vehicles like 
 those that pay for a permanent maintainer for GDAL.

This definitely seems something the Board should be talking about, the
whole question of what sponsors are visibly getting and what can be
done to get them involved, and at what should we aim.
I have added a few notes to the Agenda section for the next meeting
right before FOSS4G and i would urge anyone to add their concerns so
it can be refined - re-framed? - nearer the time...
http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php/Board_Meeting_FOSS4G2007#Agenda

 There has certainly been a lot of volunteer effort by the organizers
 of the FOSS4G 2007 conference

It is terrific to see so much effort and I am really looking forward
to getting to see it realised, taking lots of pictures, sending press
releases etc. At the same time i am having to beg and borrow to get
to Victoria and I know many, many others from outside North America 
for whom the combination of long flight and cost of living disparity
is just too large a barrier.

Something else i would like to add to the Board's discussion is the
possibility of funding either travel expenses or better, several
smaller conferences distributed around the planet, next year...

cheers,


jo
--
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Return on Equity

2007-08-30 Thread Jason Birch
I think that it's a mistake to be thinking about how to spend
OSGeo's funds until we have a business model that ensures
sufficient income to cover our expenses.
 
We're still bootstrapping, but we're almost two years in and
are still heavily reliant on Autodesk's continued involvement.
 
I sincerely hope that the new board (and Tyler) are making
this topic their highest priority.
 
Jason
 



From: Gavin Fleming
Subject: RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Return on Equity

On Jo's last point re funding travel expenses, this would be a huge
benefit for getting deserving delegates who don't have the means to Cape
Town next year and other conferences in future. Perhaps a merit- and
means- based application process could be applied.

winmail.dat___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Return on Equity

2007-08-30 Thread Paul Ramsey


It depends a great deal on whether OSGeo wants to be self-sustaining  
at the $1000 level or the $10 level. At the $1000 level we shut  
everything down and put a paypal button on the front page, mission  
accomplished.  At the $10 level, job one is to direct the money  
at places where it will eventually generate more money, and a great  
deal will depend on whether this open source geospatial stuff is as  
big as we all seem to think it is.


P.

On 30-Aug-07, at 12:50 AM, Jason Birch wrote:


I sincerely hope that the new board (and Tyler) are making
this topic their highest priority.


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


[OSGeo-Discuss] Return on Equity vs leech of resources

2007-08-30 Thread Jody Garnett

Thanks for the insight;

Right now the pitch is: We are taking part in OSGeo in order to meet 
with the rest of the community


I am not looking for much return out of OSGeo until the projects I am 
involved in finish incubation (am I alone in this?). So far I feel bad 
that we are taking up tones of time, occasional legal council 
etc...after incubation involvement should become more positive 
(marketing etc...)

Jody

Howard Butler wrote:
Open source software works because people acting in their own self 
interest have the auxiliary benefit of helping everyone in the 
project.  Report your pet bug, file a patch, add a new feature -- all 
of these things immediately help you, but ultimately help the 
project.  This activity also imparts tangential benefits that are very 
hard to quantify but can be clearly important like personal 
visibility, credibility, and status.


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Return on Equity

2007-08-30 Thread Landon Blake
I am involved in another organization that illustrates why I participate
in the OSGeo. I thought sharing that might add something to the return
on equity conversation.

On a regular basis I meet with 20 to 30 other surveyors that are members
of the local California Land Surveyors Association Chapter. We hold the
meetings to meet one another and to discuss items of concern to our
profession. I don't know that we necessarily get any tangible return on
equity from our involvement, but it is important to all of us.

I look at the OSGeo in a similar manner. I'm not GIS Certified or a
part of an organization like URISA. In a way the OSGeo serves as my
professional organization for GIS. It gives me the opportunity to learn
from and share with other GIS professionals with whom I have some common
interests and values.

I think we need to remember OSGeo is as much about the people as it is
about the software.

On a related note, I have heard that organizations like the OSGeo slowly
die if their members don't have an agenda of action items to work on.
I guess this is related to the united by a common enemy principle. I'm
not saying that we need a common enemy, but I think that having definite
problems or challenges that we address as an organization will make us
healthier. Here are some examples of the problems or challenges I am
talking about:

[1] Affordable and reasonable access to publicly funded geospatial data.
[2] Privacy concerns with geospatial data.
[3] Affordable and reasonable access to geospatial education focused on
open source software and technical principles, not on button pushing.
[4] Promotion of open source GIS as a tool that can be used to better
the lives of the people in our society.

Promotion and support of open source software is an important part of
what we do at the OSGeo. But if you really want to make OSGeo an
organization that matters to the general public you have to see it as an
organization that promotes the use of open source GIS to solve the
bigger challenges listed above. My return on equity from the OSGeo is
the opportunity to do some of those things. I don't want to just write
great open source software, I want to do great things with the software
I write. I think the OSGeo can provide me the opportunity to do that.

Landon

P.S. - Thanks to Howard for the excellent post.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jody Garnett
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 9:48 AM
To: OSGeo Discussions
Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Return on Equity vs leech of resources

Thanks for the insight;

Right now the pitch is: We are taking part in OSGeo in order to meet 
with the rest of the community

I am not looking for much return out of OSGeo until the projects I am 
involved in finish incubation (am I alone in this?). So far I feel bad 
that we are taking up tones of time, occasional legal council 
etc...after incubation involvement should become more positive 
(marketing etc...)
Jody

Howard Butler wrote:
 Open source software works because people acting in their own self 
 interest have the auxiliary benefit of helping everyone in the 
 project.  Report your pet bug, file a patch, add a new feature -- all 
 of these things immediately help you, but ultimately help the 
 project.  This activity also imparts tangential benefits that are very

 hard to quantify but can be clearly important like personal 
 visibility, credibility, and status.

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


Warning:
Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects 
including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the 
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you 
have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately.
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Return on Equity

2007-08-30 Thread Frank Warmerdam

Landon Blake wrote:

Promotion and support of open source software is an important part of
what we do at the OSGeo. But if you really want to make OSGeo an
organization that matters to the general public you have to see it as an
organization that promotes the use of open source GIS to solve the
bigger challenges listed above. My return on equity from the OSGeo is
the opportunity to do some of those things. I don't want to just write
great open source software, I want to do great things with the software
I write. I think the OSGeo can provide me the opportunity to do that.


Landon,

I think this is an interesting point.  A part of why I write open source
software is that I want my software to be used, and in particular I want
my software to enable things of social value that might not otherwise
have happened.

If there are people willing to help make it happen, I'd like to see OSGeo
support socially relavent organizations in use of open source software.

I'm not so such I worry about OSGeo an organization that matters to the
general public.  I'd be pleased to see it matter to developers and users
of open source geospatial software (and helping to grow that pool).

Best regards,
--
---+--
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush| President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Return on Equity

2007-08-30 Thread Landon Blake
Frank wrote:  I'm not worried so much about OSGeo as an organization
that matters to the general public.  I'd be pleased to see it matter to
developers and users of open source geospatial software (and helping to
grow that pool).

Perhaps it is best to start with modest goals and the goal you describe
above is a modest AND logical.

I just think that open source GIS software opens up the door for GIS to
be used in a lot of other places that are now prevented from doing so
because of price. For example, I volunteer with a non-profit
organization that assists the United States Forest Service with care of
the Mokelumne Wilderness. That type of group could never afford a
big-brand GIS program. But I am going to try to use OpenJUMP to support
their efforts. The same applies to developing countries, which has been
discussed on this list previously.

That is were the real beauty of the open source gem shines. Putting a
tool into the hands of people so that they can accomplish a greater
good. Open source software development is all about circumventing the
unbalanced desire for profit and the secrecy that results to accomplish
a greater good. It seems like a natural fit to me.

But I'm getting totally sidetracked. I apologize for that. My original
point was that I'm involved in OSGeo as much for the people as I am for
the benefits to my open source software project. The people are part of
my return on equity.

Landon (A.K.A. - The Sunburned Surveyor)


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frank Warmerdam
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2007 12:13 PM
To: OSGeo Discussions
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Return on Equity

Landon Blake wrote:
 Promotion and support of open source software is an important part of
 what we do at the OSGeo. But if you really want to make OSGeo an
 organization that matters to the general public you have to see it as
an
 organization that promotes the use of open source GIS to solve the
 bigger challenges listed above. My return on equity from the OSGeo
is
 the opportunity to do some of those things. I don't want to just write
 great open source software, I want to do great things with the
software
 I write. I think the OSGeo can provide me the opportunity to do that.

Landon,

I think this is an interesting point.  A part of why I write open source
software is that I want my software to be used, and in particular I want
my software to enable things of social value that might not otherwise
have happened.

If there are people willing to help make it happen, I'd like to see
OSGeo
support socially relavent organizations in use of open source software.

I'm not so such I worry about OSGeo an organization that matters to the
general public.  I'd be pleased to see it matter to developers and users
of open source geospatial software (and helping to grow that pool).

Best regards,
-- 
---+
--
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush| President OSGeo,
http://osgeo.org

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


Warning:
Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects 
including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the 
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, 
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you 
have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately.
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss