Sure, but it should be the GIO's role to decide when to go with one solution vs another. To me that is their job description.
Duties: Assess and plan implementation of geospatial software solutions that meet the needs of the science team. Includes web, field, desktop and database geospatial integration. Implements open standards when possible to ensure maximum interoperability and flexibility of solutions. Implements cross platform solutions for Windows, Linux, Mac, tablets and other systems already in use, Stated Preference: We prefer a candidate with experience implementing open source geospatial solutions. Current implementation includes a variety of commercial, open source, mixed and customized geospatial applications. The decision to go open source is then framed, and in the interview process, if your office has culture of Open Source you weed out candidates by their philosphy towards Open Source. This should be a valid way to judge candidates. By stating a preference for someone who already has experience or is willing to use open source its a line to divide by. It'll be pretty hard to find non open source solutions that meet at the requirements above. Thanks, Alex On 10/16/2013 09:00 AM, Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul) wrote: > Norman, > > We're thoroughly entrenched with a OpenSource installation right along side a > bunch of commercial products. It's been very hard for any commercial vendor > to even get a leg up in our office for a number of years now because we've > got so much stuff already working via OpenSource (and also available to the > commercial products.) However, we still don't have a top level position to > over see these things, and there is still splintering of resources that is > taking place. > > Bobb > > > > From: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org > [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Norman Vine > Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 10:57 AM > To: osgeo-discuss (discuss@lists.osgeo.org) > Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Defining a GIO position (or attmepting to . . .) > > disc > On Oct 16, 2013, at 11:34 AM, "Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul)" > <bob.basq...@ci.stpaul.mn.us<mailto:bob.basq...@ci.stpaul.mn.us>> wrote: > > > Arnie, > > Vendor lock-in, or rather preventing it, would be a strong second as far as > reasons go, but it's not really applicable to describing a positions work > items (I don't think) and seems like it might be closer to a policy issue (in > my mind). > > Thanks for the feedback. > > Bobb > > Bobb > > I would argue that one needs an OpenSource Reference implementation to > vet adherence to any OpenStandard > > In fact I would go even further and say that any new OpenStandard proposal > should be accompanied by an OpenSource implementation before acceptance > as such > > Norman > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Arnie Shore [mailto:shor...@gmail.com<http://gmail.com>] > Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 10:04 AM > To: Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul) > Cc: osgeo-discuss (discuss@lists.osgeo.org<mailto:discuss@lists.osgeo.org>) > Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Defining a GIO position (or > attmepting to . . .) > > Well, adherence to standards is integral to the issue of > interoperability, a critical project success factor in this > increasingly interconnected world. > > And, there's no motivation for vendor lock-in, since the revenue > protection motivation (usually!) doesn't exist. (I can tell you > re all of the verbiage I've excreted in a prior life justifying > sole-source procurements.) > > Also, possibly important for the devout among us is that the Good > Lord must love standards; She made so many of them! > > AS > > On 10/16/13, Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul) > <bob.basq...@ci.stpaul.mn.us<mailto:bob.basq...@ci.stpaul.mn.us>> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I wonder if I could get some feedback on the following > statement, I'm > > looking for the other side of the argument (I know it's hard to > put > > yourself there :c). > > "Open Source software enforces standards" ... <snip /> > > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org<mailto: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
