Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
Okay then I have 2 follow-up questions for you and/or Jeff: 1) do you acknowledge we have a problem with FOSS4G organising? 2) what other solutions to this problem do you see and why are they better than co-organising with Eclipse/LocationTech? Bart Sent from my iPhone On 14 sep. 2014, at 03:25, Venkatesh Raghavan ragha...@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp wrote: Dear All, On 2014/09/14 0:11, Jeff McKenna wrote: Responding to your comment, we now work closely with several foundations (ISPRS, ICA, GLTN, and soon GSDI, are examples that I have met with recently personally). There does seem to be something different about the way LocationTech is handing this, seems somewhat 'rushed' or 'forced', and I am not sure why this pressure. Maybe we can slow things down a bit, take the hand off the throttle, sign an MoU, maybe have booths at each other's events...similar to how OSGeo works already with these other foundations. I fully agree with views expressed by Jeff. I look forward growing collaborations with OSGeo and other international organizations in a systematic and orderly manner. Best Venka We can talk about this shortly. -jeff On 2014-09-13 7:51 AM, Andrew Ross wrote: Dear Jeff, Everyone, I'll drop in to help as well. I may be a little late as I promised my children a video chat. I apologize as I'd like to be there and help. For what it's worth, regarding the tag line agenda item, OSGeo is far from the only open source community. Unaffiliated projects in Github can claim that for example. It might be better to aim for something a bit more distinct. See you soon, Andrew On September 12, 2014 7:28:08 PM PDT, Jeff McKenna jmcke...@gatewaygeomatics.com wrote: For the record Arnulf forgot that the Board meeting starts at 8am at the same location, discussing of course the exact topics that he mentioned (http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2014-09-13). But please don't let me hinder your energy, definitely tackle the areas that need love (reviving the marketting committee, picking your favorite project in incubation and give some nudges...lots to do!) Thanks, see you early at the sprint. PS. the Board meeting, and any Board meeting, is open to anyone and everyone. -jeff On 2014-09-12 9:25 AM, Seven wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Folks, if anybody indicates interest in hacking OSGeo at the code sprint in Portland tomorrow please answer. In past years we have brain stormed around Marketing, Sponsorship, Education, Data (specifically how OSGeo can support the Open Data model) and so on. It is a aunique opportunity to evolve OSGeo as an organization and I would be happy to contribute to anything you might want to achieve for within and around OSGeo as an organization. This can also include how (or rather if at all) OSGeo manages FOSS4G. In my experience the day directly after the event is the best time to actually do this, impressions are still fresh and lots of ideas have popped up. If we do not invest some time into realizing them we are not going to get anywhere. So if you think OSGeo needs a push in a certain direction, join. There will be representatives from the board of directors, the president (I guess you are there Jeff, right?) and other folks in key roles. It is probably the only time in the year when you will get so many bright OSGeo folks in one place. Here is a link to drop your ideas. Its a Wiki, just go hack it as you like: http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Hack_2014 Cheers, Arnulf 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 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
Barend, I’m talking about the “burn-out signals that have been given recently by the current LOC (mostly because they have to re-invent the wheel every year and do a lot more than can be expected from them). So IMHO organising it this way is not sustainable in the long run, past organisers will not come back for a second round. It simply has gotten too big to organise it this way. There have been many related threads on the conference committee about this recently. Sorry if my brief summary does not reflect all of those discussions. Best regards, Bart On 14 Sep 2014, at 09:10, b.j.kob...@utwente.nl b.j.kob...@utwente.nl wrote: What actually do you perceive to be the problem with FOSS4G organising? I see it being a rather succesful, pretty large conference for the last two years, bringing in a substantial amount of income to OSGEO. One might perceive it as being not the same as it used to be, but that is because size DOES matter, and once such a thing grows over a certain size (I guess around 700+ participants or so), you just cant have the informal cosy event that used to be... Yours, Barend -- Barend Köbben Senior Lecturer ITC-University of Twente PO Box 217, 7500 AE Enschede (Netherlands) @barendkobben On 13-09-2014 23:51, Bart van den Eijnden bart...@osgis.nl wrote: Okay then I have 2 follow-up questions for you and/or Jeff: 1) do you acknowledge we have a problem with FOSS4G organising? 2) what other solutions to this problem do you see and why are they better than co-organising with Eclipse/LocationTech? Bart Sent from my iPhone On 14 sep. 2014, at 03:25, Venkatesh Raghavan ragha...@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp wrote: Dear All, On 2014/09/14 0:11, Jeff McKenna wrote: Responding to your comment, we now work closely with several foundations (ISPRS, ICA, GLTN, and soon GSDI, are examples that I have met with recently personally). There does seem to be something different about the way LocationTech is handing this, seems somewhat 'rushed' or 'forced', and I am not sure why this pressure. Maybe we can slow things down a bit, take the hand off the throttle, sign an MoU, maybe have booths at each other's events...similar to how OSGeo works already with these other foundations. I fully agree with views expressed by Jeff. I look forward growing collaborations with OSGeo and other international organizations in a systematic and orderly manner. Best Venka We can talk about this shortly. -jeff On 2014-09-13 7:51 AM, Andrew Ross wrote: Dear Jeff, Everyone, I'll drop in to help as well. I may be a little late as I promised my children a video chat. I apologize as I'd like to be there and help. For what it's worth, regarding the tag line agenda item, OSGeo is far from the only open source community. Unaffiliated projects in Github can claim that for example. It might be better to aim for something a bit more distinct. See you soon, Andrew On September 12, 2014 7:28:08 PM PDT, Jeff McKenna jmcke...@gatewaygeomatics.com wrote: For the record Arnulf forgot that the Board meeting starts at 8am at the same location, discussing of course the exact topics that he mentioned (http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2014-09-13). But please don't let me hinder your energy, definitely tackle the areas that need love (reviving the marketting committee, picking your favorite project in incubation and give some nudges...lots to do!) Thanks, see you early at the sprint. PS. the Board meeting, and any Board meeting, is open to anyone and everyone. -jeff On 2014-09-12 9:25 AM, Seven wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Folks, if anybody indicates interest in hacking OSGeo at the code sprint in Portland tomorrow please answer. In past years we have brain stormed around Marketing, Sponsorship, Education, Data (specifically how OSGeo can support the Open Data model) and so on. It is a aunique opportunity to evolve OSGeo as an organization and I would be happy to contribute to anything you might want to achieve for within and around OSGeo as an organization. This can also include how (or rather if at all) OSGeo manages FOSS4G. In my experience the day directly after the event is the best time to actually do this, impressions are still fresh and lots of ideas have popped up. If we do not invest some time into realizing them we are not going to get anywhere. So if you think OSGeo needs a push in a certain direction, join. There will be representatives from the board of directors, the president (I guess you are there Jeff, right?) and other folks in key roles. It is probably the only time in the year when you will get so many bright OSGeo folks in one place. Here
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
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 2014-09-14 10:07 GMT+02:00 Bart van den Eijnden bart...@osgis.nl: Barend, I'm talking about the burn-out signals that have been given recently by the current LOC (mostly because they have to re-invent the wheel every year and do a lot more than can be expected from them). So IMHO organising it this way is not sustainable in the long run, past organisers will not come back for a second round. It simply has gotten too big to organise it this way. There have been many related threads on the conference committee about this recently. Sorry if my brief summary does not reflect all of those discussions. Best regards, Bart On 14 Sep 2014, at 09:10, b.j.kob...@utwente.nl b.j.kob...@utwente.nl wrote: What actually do you perceive to be the problem with FOSS4G organising? I see it being a rather succesful, pretty large conference for the last two years, bringing in a substantial amount of income to OSGEO. One might perceive it as being not the same as it used to be, but that is because size DOES matter, and once such a thing grows over a certain size (I guess around 700+ participants or so), you just cant have the informal cosy event that used to be... Yours, Barend -- Barend Köbben Senior Lecturer - ITC-University of Twente PO Box 217, 7500 AE Enschede (Netherlands) @barendkobben On 13-09-2014 23:51, Bart van den Eijnden bart...@osgis.nl wrote: Okay then I have 2 follow-up questions for you and/or Jeff: 1) do you acknowledge we have a problem with FOSS4G organising? 2) what other solutions to this problem do you see and why are they better than co-organising with Eclipse/LocationTech? Bart Sent from my iPhone On 14 sep. 2014, at 03:25, Venkatesh Raghavan ragha...@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp wrote: Dear All, On 2014/09/14 0:11, Jeff McKenna wrote: Responding to your comment, we now work closely with several foundations (ISPRS, ICA, GLTN, and soon GSDI, are examples that I have met with recently personally). There does seem to be something different about the way LocationTech is handing this, seems somewhat 'rushed' or 'forced', and I am not sure why this pressure. Maybe we can slow things down a bit, take the hand off the throttle, sign an MoU, maybe have booths at each other's events...similar to how OSGeo works already with these other foundations. I fully agree with views expressed by Jeff. I look forward growing collaborations with OSGeo and other international organizations in a systematic and orderly manner. Best Venka We can talk about this shortly. -jeff On 2014-09-13 7:51 AM, Andrew Ross wrote: Dear Jeff, Everyone, I'll drop in to help as well. I may be a little late as I promised my children a video chat. I apologize as I'd like to be there and help. For what it's worth, regarding the tag line agenda item, OSGeo is far from the only open source community. Unaffiliated projects in Github can claim that for example. It might be better to aim for something a bit more
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
Dear Jachym, Everyone Just a few quite thoughts. I encourage anyone who has concerns, or fears anything resembling a take-over to please speak up on the list, off-list with any other person from OSGeo me, or even just me in private. We, people involved with both OSGeo LocationTech, have been talking for roughly 2 years. I don't think everyone is fully aware of the fact that at each step collaboration was possible, we approached the OSGeo board other leaders in the community discretely to talk about it and once there was a rough plan, followed-through publicly such as bidding on FOSS4G 2014, organizing FOSS4G NA 2015. I can't think of anything that was done improperly. We're very open to feedback in public or private about this. The team organizing assembling the program for FOSS4G NA 2015 is a team of 11 people volunteering from the community. These are people well known to OSGeo and many have participated in past FOSS4G teams. They are freed up from the burden of the logistics of organizing the conference by Anne Jacko's team at the Eclipse Foundation who organizes conferences for a living. I believe that there will be more control in such a circumstance. For what it's worth, when discussing with the OSGeo board yesterday we noticed obvious signs of this like much more prominent mention of OSGeo OSGeo's logo on the FOSS4G NA web site. Also, FOSS4G NA 2015 speakers will get free passes. We hope this is seen as a nice positive step forward. Kind regards, Andrew On 14/09/14 07:25, 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 2014-09-14 10:07 GMT+02:00 Bart van den Eijnden bart...@osgis.nl: Barend, I'm talking about the burn-out signals that have been given recently by the current LOC (mostly because they have to re-invent the wheel every year and do a lot more than can be expected from them). So IMHO organising it this way is not sustainable in the long run, past organisers will not come back for a second round. It simply has gotten too big to organise it this way. There have been many related threads on the conference committee about this recently. Sorry if my brief summary does not reflect all of those discussions. Best regards, Bart On 14 Sep 2014, at 09:10, b.j.kob...@utwente.nl b.j.kob...@utwente.nl wrote: What actually do you perceive to be the problem with FOSS4G organising? I see it being a rather succesful, pretty large conference for the last two years, bringing in a substantial amount of income to OSGEO. One might perceive it as being not the same as it used to be, but that is because size DOES matter, and once such a thing grows over a certain size (I guess around 700+ participants or so), you just cant have the informal cosy event that used to be... Yours, Barend -- Barend Köbben Senior Lecturer - ITC-University of Twente PO Box 217, 7500 AE Enschede (Netherlands) @barendkobben On 13-09-2014 23:51, Bart van den Eijnden bart...@osgis.nl wrote: Okay then I have 2 follow-up questions for you and/or Jeff: 1) do you
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
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 http://www.mapgears.com/ Provider of Professional MapServer Support since 2000 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
Looking forward to see things happen. Good luck Jachym 2014-09-14 17:07 GMT+02:00 Andrew Ross andrew.r...@eclipse.org: Dear Jachym, Everyone Just a few quite thoughts. I encourage anyone who has concerns, or fears anything resembling a take-over to please speak up on the list, off-list with any other person from OSGeo me, or even just me in private. We, people involved with both OSGeo LocationTech, have been talking for roughly 2 years. I don't think everyone is fully aware of the fact that at each step collaboration was possible, we approached the OSGeo board other leaders in the community discretely to talk about it and once there was a rough plan, followed-through publicly such as bidding on FOSS4G 2014, organizing FOSS4G NA 2015. I can't think of anything that was done improperly. We're very open to feedback in public or private about this. The team organizing assembling the program for FOSS4G NA 2015 is a team of 11 people volunteering from the community. These are people well known to OSGeo and many have participated in past FOSS4G teams. They are freed up from the burden of the logistics of organizing the conference by Anne Jacko's team at the Eclipse Foundation who organizes conferences for a living. I believe that there will be more control in such a circumstance. For what it's worth, when discussing with the OSGeo board yesterday we noticed obvious signs of this like much more prominent mention of OSGeo OSGeo's logo on the FOSS4G NA web site. Also, FOSS4G NA 2015 speakers will get free passes. We hope this is seen as a nice positive step forward. Kind regards, Andrew On 14/09/14 07:25, 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 2014-09-14 10:07 GMT+02:00 Bart van den Eijnden bart...@osgis.nl: Barend, I'm talking about the burn-out signals that have been given recently by the current LOC (mostly because they have to re-invent the wheel every year and do a lot more than can be expected from them). So IMHO organising it this way is not sustainable in the long run, past organisers will not come back for a second round. It simply has gotten too big to organise it this way. There have been many related threads on the conference committee about this recently. Sorry if my brief summary does not reflect all of those discussions. Best regards, Bart On 14 Sep 2014, at 09:10, b.j.kob...@utwente.nl b.j.kob...@utwente.nl wrote: What actually do you perceive to be the problem with FOSS4G organising? I see it being a rather succesful, pretty large conference for the last two years, bringing in a substantial amount of income to OSGEO. One might perceive it as being not the same as it used to be, but that is because size DOES matter, and once such a thing grows over a certain size (I guess around 700+ participants or so), you just cant have the informal cosy event that used to be... Yours, Barend -- Barend Köbben Senior Lecturer - ITC-University of Twente PO Box 217, 7500 AE
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
Thanks for letting us/me know about this plan Claude, it is really wonderful that you are planning a 10-year FOSS4G reunion event in Lausanne. I encourage all communities that are thinking of hosting 2016 to begin preparing their bids, and we will make sure to get the 2016 bid out shortly. Talk soon! :) -jeff On 2014-09-14 9:02 AM, Claude Philipona wrote: Hi Bart, So IMHO organising it this way is not sustainable in the long run, past organisers will not come back for a second round. It simply has gotten too big to organise it this way. This is maybe a bit of a quick answer. As I told several people this week, we would be ready to organize a second edition in Lausanne in 2016 to celebrate the 10th anniversary of 2006 edition. Most of the previous involved organizations would be happy to start again. We would have the chance to use the brand new Swiss Tech Convention Center, a high tech very modular facility, that can accommodate conference up to 3000 attendess. Check the the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqRy1Mxm27s Swiss Tech Convention Center: http://www.tstcc.ch/en/index.php Also, I don't think foss4g as grown that much. In Lausanne there were 570 pre-registered attendees + 80 that registered on site. Actually what as grown is more the fees than the number of attendees. Early Bird Workshop Registration (per half day): 2014:$100 / 2006:~$50 Early Bird Conference Registration 2014: $650 / 2006:~$250 Regular Workshop Registration (per half day): 2014: $150 / 2006:~$75 Regular Conference Registration: 2014: $750 / 2006:~$300 And Switzerland is not known as the cheapest country in the world... I'm not saying that 2014 prices are too expensive, don't understand me wrong. I'm just saying that over the years, several tasks have been subcontracted by the local committee, which is possible with higher fees, so I would say that the risk of organizer burnout has reduced, not increased over the years. And finally, thank you very much to all organizers, volunteers, of FOSS4G 2014 PDX, it was a wonderful and successful edition. I really enjoyed it. Claude On Sun, Sep 14, 2014 at 1:07 AM, Bart van den Eijnden bart...@osgis.nl wrote: Barend, I’m talking about the “burn-out signals that have been given recently by the current LOC (mostly because they have to re-invent the wheel every year and do a lot more than can be expected from them). So IMHO organising it this way is not sustainable in the long run, past organisers will not come back for a second round. It simply has gotten too big to organise it this way. There have been many related threads on the conference committee about this recently. Sorry if my brief summary does not reflect all of those discussions. Best regards, Bart On 14 Sep 2014, at 09:10, b.j.kob...@utwente.nl b.j.kob...@utwente.nl wrote: What actually do you perceive to be the problem with FOSS4G organising? I see it being a rather succesful, pretty large conference for the last two years, bringing in a substantial amount of income to OSGEO. One might perceive it as being not the same as it used to be, but that is because size DOES matter, and once such a thing grows over a certain size (I guess around 700+ participants or so), you just cant have the informal cosy event that used to be... Yours, Barend -- Barend Köbben Senior Lecturer ITC-University of Twente PO Box 217, 7500 AE Enschede (Netherlands) @barendkobben On 13-09-2014 23:51, Bart van den Eijnden bart...@osgis.nl wrote: Okay then I have 2 follow-up questions for you and/or Jeff: 1) do you acknowledge we have a problem with FOSS4G organising? 2) what other solutions to this problem do you see and why are they better than co-organising with Eclipse/LocationTech? Bart Sent from my iPhone On 14 sep. 2014, at 03:25, Venkatesh Raghavan ragha...@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp wrote: Dear All, On 2014/09/14 0:11, Jeff McKenna wrote: Responding to your comment, we now work closely with several foundations (ISPRS, ICA, GLTN, and soon GSDI, are examples that I have met with recently personally). There does seem to be something different about the way LocationTech is handing this, seems somewhat 'rushed' or 'forced', and I am not sure why this pressure. Maybe we can slow things down a bit, take the hand off the throttle, sign an MoU, maybe have booths at each other's events...similar to how OSGeo works already with these other foundations. I fully agree with views expressed by Jeff. I look forward growing collaborations with OSGeo and other international organizations in a systematic and orderly manner. Best Venka We can talk about this shortly. -jeff On 2014-09-13 7:51 AM, Andrew Ross wrote: Dear Jeff, Everyone, I'll drop in to help as well. I may be a little late as I promised my children a video chat. I apologize as I'd like to be there and help. For what it's worth, regarding the tag line agenda item, OSGeo is far from the only open source community. Unaffiliated projects
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
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 massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch 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
