Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Fun Event in Victoria with mix of OSGeo/LocationTech projects

[Massimiliano Cannata]

The collaboration seems to me that OSGeo his a member of LocationTech and
that a liason officier has been appointed.

There has not been defined any obligation, common goals, actions or
objective that are the basis for a collaboration.
So in my opinion a MoU is a pre-requisite for a first step into
collaboration.

Maxi

2015-11-12 19:54 GMT+01:00 Jody Garnett :

> I am glad this thread is encouraging communication.
>
> As stated at the start I would like to do a better job of communication on
> this one. I guess I can start by saying the two organizations have a much
> stronger relationship than a Memorandum of Understanding. A MoU is often
> the first stage of a formal contract, in this case the formal relationship
> has been realized.
>
> See http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2012-10-11
>
> The result of this is that OSGeo is a member of LocationTech (see the list
> of members here ). And has provided
> a representative to the steering committee meetings and speak on behalf of
> OSGeo.
>
> (Is this kind of background useful - I feel I am being painfully
> obvious/annoying on this one)
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
> On 12 November 2015 at 11:01, Jody Garnett  wrote:
>
>> I have not done the best at communicating lately, here is a write up from
>> a fun event held last month in victoria -
>> http://www.how2map.com/2015/10/locationtech-tour-2015.html
>>
>> A really positive mix of OSGeo and LocationTech projects. In many cases
>> this event was the first introduction to open source for those attending -
>> making this an excellent outreach opportunity.
>>
>> I have gotten a number of private emails expressing concerns about
>> LocationTech being involved in several of the foss4g bids. I guess I had
>> the opposite concern last year when there was the joint OSGeo /
>> LocationTech foss4gna conference. I was kind of embarrassed our behavior as
>> a community - would prefer to see us as welcoming and supportive
>> (especially as we had a first time organizer that could use our support).
>>
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>
>
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>



-- 
*Massimiliano Cannata*

Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica

Responsabile settore Geomatica


Istituto scienze della Terra

Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design

Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana

Campus Trevano, CH - 6952 Canobbio

Tel. +41 (0)58 666 62 14

Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09

massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch

*www.supsi.ch/ist *
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Fun Event in Victoria with mix of OSGeo/LocationTech projects

[Jody Garnett]

Perhaps it is somewhere in between - this is not simply a "liaison
officer". As a member OSGeo (and OGC for that matter) helps guide the
direction of LocationTech. This is a stronger statement then a MoU.
--
Jody Garnett

On 13 November 2015 at 09:54, Massimiliano Cannata <
massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch> wrote:

> The collaboration seems to me that OSGeo his a member of LocationTech and
> that a liason officier has been appointed.
>
> There has not been defined any obligation, common goals, actions or
> objective that are the basis for a collaboration.
> So in my opinion a MoU is a pre-requisite for a first step into
> collaboration.
>
> Maxi
>
> 2015-11-12 19:54 GMT+01:00 Jody Garnett :
>
>> I am glad this thread is encouraging communication.
>>
>> As stated at the start I would like to do a better job of communication
>> on this one. I guess I can start by saying the two organizations have a
>> much stronger relationship than a Memorandum of Understanding. A MoU is
>> often the first stage of a formal contract, in this case the formal
>> relationship has been realized.
>>
>> See http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2012-10-11
>>
>> The result of this is that OSGeo is a member of LocationTech (see the
>> list of members here ). And has
>> provided a representative to the steering committee meetings and speak on
>> behalf of OSGeo.
>>
>> (Is this kind of background useful - I feel I am being painfully
>> obvious/annoying on this one)
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 12 November 2015 at 11:01, Jody Garnett 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I have not done the best at communicating lately, here is a write up
>>> from a fun event held last month in victoria -
>>> http://www.how2map.com/2015/10/locationtech-tour-2015.html
>>>
>>> A really positive mix of OSGeo and LocationTech projects. In many cases
>>> this event was the first introduction to open source for those attending -
>>> making this an excellent outreach opportunity.
>>>
>>> I have gotten a number of private emails expressing concerns about
>>> LocationTech being involved in several of the foss4g bids. I guess I had
>>> the opposite concern last year when there was the joint OSGeo /
>>> LocationTech foss4gna conference. I was kind of embarrassed our behavior as
>>> a community - would prefer to see us as welcoming and supportive
>>> (especially as we had a first time organizer that could use our support).
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jody Garnett
>>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Massimiliano Cannata*
>
> Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica
>
> Responsabile settore Geomatica
>
>
> Istituto scienze della Terra
>
> Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design
>
> Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana
>
> Campus Trevano, CH - 6952 Canobbio
>
> Tel. +41 (0)58 666 62 14
>
> Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09
>
> massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch
>
> *www.supsi.ch/ist *
>
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[OSGeo-Discuss] Fun Event in Victoria with mix of OSGeo/LocationTech projects

[Jody Garnett]

I have not done the best at communicating lately, here is a write up from a
fun event held last month in victoria -
http://www.how2map.com/2015/10/locationtech-tour-2015.html

A really positive mix of OSGeo and LocationTech projects. In many cases
this event was the first introduction to open source for those attending -
making this an excellent outreach opportunity.

I have gotten a number of private emails expressing concerns about
LocationTech being involved in several of the foss4g bids. I guess I had
the opposite concern last year when there was the joint OSGeo /
LocationTech foss4gna conference. I was kind of embarrassed our behavior as
a community - would prefer to see us as welcoming and supportive
(especially as we had a first time organizer that could use our support).

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

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Fun Event in Victoria with mix of OSGeo/LocationTech projects

[Jeff McKenna]

On 2015-11-12 7:01 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:


I have gotten a number of private emails expressing concerns about
LocationTech being involved in several of the foss4g bids. I guess I had
the opposite concern last year when there was the joint OSGeo /
LocationTech foss4gna conference. I was kind of embarrassed our behavior
as a community - would prefer to see us as welcoming and supportive
(especially as we had a first time organizer that could use our support).


Hi Jody,

I am very glad that you brought this up publicly.  Lately I too have 
received very disturbing direct emails, containing threats of "if this 
happens you watch" "karma you watch yourself" "if we lose you watch out" 
and direct bullying tactics, for speaking my mind on this issue.  The 
same people sending these threats will not speak publicly on this, so I 
have asked them to stop sending me these messages, but the messages 
continue, so I have stopped answering them.  These are "power-play" 
emails sent directly to me, but I will tell them here publicly, bullying 
me will not stop me from speaking openly about OSGeo's one event all 
year, the global FOSS4G. (for those not following the 2017 conference 
discussions, you would have to read a long thread to get caught up 
http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Call-to-discuss-FOSS4G-2017-proposals-prior-to-voting-td5234235.html).


As someone just wrote last night on another list, likely there would be 
no one else that has attended more FOSS4G events, regional, global, 
anything, than myself. I make a point of going to a FOSS4G event, to 
help grow the local community, no matter what size of the event or where 
it is.  Lately in my FOSS4G travels I have noticed a return to our 
FOSS4G roots, where the popular events are very low cost, aimed at 
developers, users, students, researchers, and the smaller companies 
trying to make a living (a great recent example is the FOSS4G-Como event 
this past July).  Getting back to the topic of your message: I too have 
been embarrassed by recent FOSS4G-NorthAmerica events; I was shocked to 
see the 1,000 USD registration fee there.


But I was not too upset, because no one is traveling the small FOSS4Gs 
like me to see the difference, and I didn't see complaints voiced from 
the local NorthAmerican community.  LocationTech involved in FOSS4G-NA 
is a good thing, to promote business and give those businesses a stage; 
the core goal of LocationTech.


However now we are in the process for deciding the global FOSS4G event 
for 2017, OSGeo's flagship event, attended by the international 
community, and we must be very careful.  Working with foundations is 
good (hence all of OSGeo's great MoUs), and I'll use the upcoming 
example that the 2016 team is considering, giving LocationTech a 90 
minute slot in the program for their projects (and the same for OSGeo, 
UN, likely OGC, and other organizations).  This is a wonderful way for 
OSGeo's FOSS4G event to involve other organizations.  I hope that 
LocationTech will also give OSGeo a 90 minute slot in their big 
conference someday as well; this would be exactly what I see as 
best-case scenario.


On the other hand, not signing an MoU, and then just contacting all of 
our 2017 bidders, is quite a different method to get to the table. 
Instead of a long-standing MoU agreement that would foster the 
relationship throughout the years, as we have with so many 
organizations, we are faced with a decision now that involves both 
foundations and 1,000,000 USD (the annual FOSS4G event generates a lot 
of revenue, making this very attractive to professional conference 
companies all over the world, I was phoned yesterday by one from Europe, 
for example).  The money is there, huge money, and huge exposure for 
these companies.  And their jobs are on the line, in their minds.  Hence 
this situation we are forced to deal with now, and these nasty private 
messages being sent to me.


Let's try to remain positive though, as we have 3 great bids for FOSS4G 
2017, and a solid team working hard already to make FOSS4G-2016 in Bonn 
another amazing event.  OSGeo has never been so active and vibrant as so 
many initiatives and location chapters grow all around the world.


Thanks for listening, and thank you Jody for bringing this topic to the 
public lists.


-jeff


--
Jeff McKenna
President, OSGeo
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna








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

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Fun Event in Victoria with mix of OSGeo/LocationTech projects

[Jeff McKenna]

Hi Rob,

Thanks for this explanation. I can tell you that talking with you has 
helped, and also that just now the OSGeo Board has agreed to talk about 
building this LocationTech relationship, at our next face-to-face 
meeting at the end of January. This is excellent news. These 
relationships take time to formalize.


As for commercial-friendliness, I can tell you that this also plays a 
big part in OSGeo (but this isn't in our main tagline).  This is 
something that the new OSGeo Board will review I'm sure.  I know that 
there is talk of formal structure being created inside the OSGeo 
foundation, to focus on these business interests (several members of 
various OSGeo local chapters in Europe are speaking of this possibility).


I'm sure there were good reasons to create another foundation with the 
exact same goals.  However the "conflict of interest" (to use the term 
used on a different list about this) of the one foundation calculating a 
way to smoothly get onto our one event's table, these 2 foundations with 
the same goal sort of, collide, over OSGeo's yearly event.  That is 
definitely tricky (hence all these emails, private emails, and lack of 
sleep for me lately).


However for now I will focus on today's positives of the OSGeo Board 
looking to define the relationship with LocationTech, slowly.


Talk soon,

-jeff



On 2015-11-12 12:53 PM, Rob Emanuele wrote:

Hi Jeff,

You are right, commercial-friendliness certainly does play a part in
LocationTech. The way I've seen that enacted is by the use of the
Eclipse Foundation's legal department to ensure that the projects which
are supported by LocationTech are declared by a legal team to be free of
proprietary or wrongly-licensed code. In this way, commercial entities
can use the projects with some assurance that they will not be sued down
the line for code that was not actually open in the way they thought it
was.

Also, there is a steering committee that makes decisions about how the
budget will be used. The budget mainly consists of member company's
dues. The members of the steering committee are decided by membership
level (large membership gets representation on the steering committee)
as well as a lower-membership level elected committee. There is also
representation by the developers, who vote independently of any company
and are there to represent the committers on the project. For more
information, you can read through some links here:

https://www.locationtech.org/charter
https://www.locationtech.org/election2015

In practice, as a maintainer of an open source project and developer,
what LocationTech has meant to me is support for my project in ways that
are not centered around business. To me it's been a place where I've
gotten to collaborate with similar open source projects and have my
project be promoted through events and other channels; for instance I
participate in Google Summer of Code and Facebook Open Academy as a
mentor through the Eclipse Foundation. Perhaps these are needs that can
also be served by OSGeo, but they have in practice been met by
LocationTech. From my perspective as a project lead and open source
developer, that there are multiple channels that can potentially support
me and my project is a great thing and signs of a healthy domain.

I did not start LocationTech. So for me it's not a question of, why
should LocationTech be created when there is already OSGeo; LocationTech
already exists, and I don't think it's up to me to question it's
existence. Nor do I think it's a useful exercise to question the
existence of something that clearly has support and is supporting
others. I can only decide which organizations I believe in and support,
and what I can get out of those organizations as far as them supporting
me. So on a personal level, my thoughts are that both OSGeo and
LocationTech are good organizations. I'd like to find ways to support
both organizations, and find ways both organizations can support me and
my project.

On a more general level, I'm against centralization. Having diversity in
governance structures, funding models and support channels is a good
thing, and I don't want there to be only one "true" organization that I
can look to for support. However, like I mentioned, the ideal would be
that those organizations could figure out how to use their difference
skill sets to work together on making the community as a whole move
forward. And that is what I am hoping OSGeo and LocationTech can do (as
well as any other related organizations).

Jody did a talk at FOSS4G NA 2015 on some of the differences between
LocationTech and OSGeo, I recommend it:
https://youtu.be/sdpEa6XdQEo

Best,
Rob

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Jeff McKenna
>
wrote:

Hi Rob,

Thank you for your very thoughtful response.  You summarize the
situation very well.  I think talking openly like this on this
topic, is the only way to make this all 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Fun Event in Victoria with mix of OSGeo/LocationTech projects

[Rob Emanuele]

Hi Jeff,

I'm sorry to hear you are being bullied in private messages. It is perhaps
best to bring in the Code of Conduct committee to help handle this; direct
threats and private bulling tactics seem in violation with the CoC, and
there should be steps taken to ensure that our community doesn't have
bulling in our midst that goes unaddressed.

I'm disappointed that you take LocationTech's core goal as "to promote
business and give those businesses a stage". Your point of view and
behavior on the lists makes more sense knowing that, though; if you believe
that LocationTech is really about promoting the businesses, and not the
greater community, then having LocationTech involved in the FOSS4G
conferences would diminish the non-business community members' role in the
conference, which would be a Bad thing. However, as a member of the
LocationTech PMC and someone who was/is involved in the FOSS4G NA 2015 and
FOSS4G NA 2016 process, as well as someone involved in the FOSS4G 2017
Philadelphia bid, I want to assure you that is not the case.

There is real focus and real work being done at LocationTech to help the
community of developers and users of FOSS4G. In this instance I'm using
FOSS4G for what the acronym actually means, Free and Open Source Software
for Geospatial, not referring to the conference that has captured that
name. Both LocationTech and OSGeo exist to support FOSS4G, and the greater
community (greater then both of those organizations) that use and develop
FOSS4G. There are differences in the organizations for sure, and I think
highlighting those differences and really understanding how they serve the
community in different ways is important. The ideal scenario that I see is
that both organizations would use those differences to collaborate and have
a sum-greater-than-it's-parts type of support system for FOSS4G. Instead,
we have a situation where there's distrust, finger pointing, and political
"power plays" against each other. We have the president of one of the
organizations characterizing the core goal of the other organization in a
dangerously wrong way. We have decisions and discussions about a million
dollar revenue generating conference focused on that million dollars,
rather then how to ensure that conference does the best job possible at
supporting and pushing forward the community. We have the precious resource
that is the energy of volunteers being spent on political infighting rather
than on collaboration towards serving the community. I'm not sure the best
path forward for this, but I want to declare that the situation as I see it
is bad for the community, collaboration between OSGeo and LocationTech
would be good for the community, and I hope as a whole we can move towards
that better future.

I hear your concerns for the price of the FOSS4G NA tickets, though I'll
point out to people who are following along that it's not as simple as a
flat $1000 dollar rate. I encourage you to look at the registration pricing
breakdown when it's published for FOSS4G NA 2016, be sure to apply for a
non-corporate pass if you will not be reimbursed by a company, and to apply
for a scholarship if the cost is still too high. Also, if you are giving a
talk, registration is free, so please submit! The Call For Proposals is now
open (https://2016.foss4g-na.org/cfp). Jeff, your presence was missed at
FOSS4G NA 2015 and I hope that you can come to Raleigh for FOSS4G NA 2016.

Best,
Rob







On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Jeff McKenna  wrote:

> On 2015-11-12 7:01 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>
>>
>> I have gotten a number of private emails expressing concerns about
>> LocationTech being involved in several of the foss4g bids. I guess I had
>> the opposite concern last year when there was the joint OSGeo /
>> LocationTech foss4gna conference. I was kind of embarrassed our behavior
>> as a community - would prefer to see us as welcoming and supportive
>> (especially as we had a first time organizer that could use our support).
>>
>> Hi Jody,
>
> I am very glad that you brought this up publicly.  Lately I too have
> received very disturbing direct emails, containing threats of "if this
> happens you watch" "karma you watch yourself" "if we lose you watch out"
> and direct bullying tactics, for speaking my mind on this issue.  The same
> people sending these threats will not speak publicly on this, so I have
> asked them to stop sending me these messages, but the messages continue, so
> I have stopped answering them.  These are "power-play" emails sent directly
> to me, but I will tell them here publicly, bullying me will not stop me
> from speaking openly about OSGeo's one event all year, the global FOSS4G.
> (for those not following the 2017 conference discussions, you would have to
> read a long thread to get caught up
> http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Call-to-discuss-FOSS4G-2017-proposals-prior-to-voting-td5234235.html
> ).
>
> As someone just wrote last night on another 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Fun Event in Victoria with mix of OSGeo/LocationTech projects

[Jody Garnett]

>
> I hope that LocationTech will also give OSGeo a 90 minute slot in their
> big conference someday as well; this would be exactly what I see as
> best-case scenario.


This already is the case, the locationtech tour is the "big conference". In
this case it is a series of small events (ranging from 30 people to 200
people depending on the city).

As mentioned above OSGeo projects were the headline for the event, far in
excess of 90 mins :)
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Fun Event in Victoria with mix of OSGeo/LocationTech projects

[Venkatesh Raghavan]

Hi Jody,

On 2015/11/12 20:01, Jody Garnett wrote:

I have gotten a number of private emails expressing concerns about
LocationTech being involved in several of the foss4g bids. I guess I had
the opposite concern last year when there was the joint OSGeo /
LocationTech foss4gna conference. I was kind of embarrassed our behavior as
a community - would prefer to see us as welcoming and supportive
(especially as we had a first time organizer that could use our support).


Can you clarify what "our" in your e-mail points to?
I cannot understand "*our* behaviour as a community" and
"first time organizer that could use *our* support.

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

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Fun Event in Victoria with mix of OSGeo/LocationTech projects

[Jeff McKenna]

Hi Rob,

Thank you for your very thoughtful response.  You summarize the 
situation very well.  I think talking openly like this on this topic, is 
the only way to make this all work.


It sounds like I am wrong about LocationTech's goals; at the same time 
then, if that is the case, that LocationTech is not about commerce 
(doesn't "commercially friendly" encourage business interest?), then 
what was the need to create a separate new foundation, also focused on 
growing Open Source geospatial software?


I hope we can speak openly here Rob, I do not mean any disrespect to you 
personally or to LocationTech (some take it personal).  Please share 
here the reasons you see to have 2 foundations focused on the same goal.


Thanks,

-jeff



On 2015-11-12 11:37 AM, Rob Emanuele wrote:

Hi Jeff,

I'm sorry to hear you are being bullied in private messages. It is
perhaps best to bring in the Code of Conduct committee to help handle
this; direct threats and private bulling tactics seem in violation with
the CoC, and there should be steps taken to ensure that our community
doesn't have bulling in our midst that goes unaddressed.

I'm disappointed that you take LocationTech's core goal as "to promote
business and give those businesses a stage". Your point of view and
behavior on the lists makes more sense knowing that, though; if you
believe that LocationTech is really about promoting the businesses, and
not the greater community, then having LocationTech involved in the
FOSS4G conferences would diminish the non-business community members'
role in the conference, which would be a Bad thing. However, as a member
of the LocationTech PMC and someone who was/is involved in the FOSS4G NA
2015 and FOSS4G NA 2016 process, as well as someone involved in the
FOSS4G 2017 Philadelphia bid, I want to assure you that is not the case.

There is real focus and real work being done at LocationTech to help the
community of developers and users of FOSS4G. In this instance I'm using
FOSS4G for what the acronym actually means, Free and Open Source
Software for Geospatial, not referring to the conference that has
captured that name. Both LocationTech and OSGeo exist to support FOSS4G,
and the greater community (greater then both of those organizations)
that use and develop FOSS4G. There are differences in the organizations
for sure, and I think highlighting those differences and really
understanding how they serve the community in different ways is
important. The ideal scenario that I see is that both organizations
would use those differences to collaborate and have a
sum-greater-than-it's-parts type of support system for FOSS4G. Instead,
we have a situation where there's distrust, finger pointing, and
political "power plays" against each other. We have the president of one
of the organizations characterizing the core goal of the other
organization in a dangerously wrong way. We have decisions and
discussions about a million dollar revenue generating conference focused
on that million dollars, rather then how to ensure that conference does
the best job possible at supporting and pushing forward the community.
We have the precious resource that is the energy of volunteers being
spent on political infighting rather than on collaboration towards
serving the community. I'm not sure the best path forward for this, but
I want to declare that the situation as I see it is bad for the
community, collaboration between OSGeo and LocationTech would be good
for the community, and I hope as a whole we can move towards that better
future.

I hear your concerns for the price of the FOSS4G NA tickets, though I'll
point out to people who are following along that it's not as simple as a
flat $1000 dollar rate. I encourage you to look at the registration
pricing breakdown when it's published for FOSS4G NA 2016, be sure to
apply for a non-corporate pass if you will not be reimbursed by a
company, and to apply for a scholarship if the cost is still too high.
Also, if you are giving a talk, registration is free, so please submit!
The Call For Proposals is now open (https://2016.foss4g-na.org/cfp).
Jeff, your presence was missed at FOSS4G NA 2015 and I hope that you can
come to Raleigh for FOSS4G NA 2016.

Best,
Rob







On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Jeff McKenna
>
wrote:

On 2015-11-12 7:01 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:


I have gotten a number of private emails expressing concerns about
LocationTech being involved in several of the foss4g bids. I
guess I had
the opposite concern last year when there was the joint OSGeo /
LocationTech foss4gna conference. I was kind of embarrassed our
behavior
as a community - would prefer to see us as welcoming and supportive
(especially as we had a first time organizer that could use our
support).

Hi Jody,

I am very glad that you brought this up publicly.  Lately I too 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Fun Event in Victoria with mix of OSGeo/LocationTech projects

[Jody Garnett]

> Thanks for listening, and thank you Jody for bringing this topic to the
> public lists.
>

After your long email I am not sure I understand what is going on, my main
concern was that we be welcoming and collaborative (the same foundation we
build open source on).

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

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Fun Event in Victoria with mix of OSGeo/LocationTech projects

[Rob Emanuele]

Hi Jeff,

You are right, commercial-friendliness certainly does play a part in
LocationTech. The way I've seen that enacted is by the use of the Eclipse
Foundation's legal department to ensure that the projects which are
supported by LocationTech are declared by a legal team to be free of
proprietary or wrongly-licensed code. In this way, commercial entities can
use the projects with some assurance that they will not be sued down the
line for code that was not actually open in the way they thought it was.

Also, there is a steering committee that makes decisions about how the
budget will be used. The budget mainly consists of member company's dues.
The members of the steering committee are decided by membership level
(large membership gets representation on the steering committee) as well as
a lower-membership level elected committee. There is also representation by
the developers, who vote independently of any company and are there to
represent the committers on the project. For more information, you can read
through some links here:

https://www.locationtech.org/charter
https://www.locationtech.org/election2015

In practice, as a maintainer of an open source project and developer, what
LocationTech has meant to me is support for my project in ways that are not
centered around business. To me it's been a place where I've gotten to
collaborate with similar open source projects and have my project be
promoted through events and other channels; for instance I participate in
Google Summer of Code and Facebook Open Academy as a mentor through the
Eclipse Foundation. Perhaps these are needs that can also be served by
OSGeo, but they have in practice been met by LocationTech. From my
perspective as a project lead and open source developer, that there are
multiple channels that can potentially support me and my project is a great
thing and signs of a healthy domain.

I did not start LocationTech. So for me it's not a question of, why should
LocationTech be created when there is already OSGeo; LocationTech already
exists, and I don't think it's up to me to question it's existence. Nor do
I think it's a useful exercise to question the existence of something that
clearly has support and is supporting others. I can only decide which
organizations I believe in and support, and what I can get out of those
organizations as far as them supporting me. So on a personal level, my
thoughts are that both OSGeo and LocationTech are good organizations. I'd
like to find ways to support both organizations, and find ways both
organizations can support me and my project.

On a more general level, I'm against centralization. Having diversity in
governance structures, funding models and support channels is a good thing,
and I don't want there to be only one "true" organization that I can look
to for support. However, like I mentioned, the ideal would be that those
organizations could figure out how to use their difference skill sets to
work together on making the community as a whole move forward. And that is
what I am hoping OSGeo and LocationTech can do (as well as any other
related organizations).

Jody did a talk at FOSS4G NA 2015 on some of the differences between
LocationTech and OSGeo, I recommend it:
https://youtu.be/sdpEa6XdQEo

Best,
Rob

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Jeff McKenna <
jmcke...@gatewaygeomatics.com> wrote:

> Hi Rob,
>
> Thank you for your very thoughtful response.  You summarize the situation
> very well.  I think talking openly like this on this topic, is the only way
> to make this all work.
>
> It sounds like I am wrong about LocationTech's goals; at the same time
> then, if that is the case, that LocationTech is not about commerce (doesn't
> "commercially friendly" encourage business interest?), then what was the
> need to create a separate new foundation, also focused on growing Open
> Source geospatial software?
>
> I hope we can speak openly here Rob, I do not mean any disrespect to you
> personally or to LocationTech (some take it personal).  Please share here
> the reasons you see to have 2 foundations focused on the same goal.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -jeff
>
>
>
>
> On 2015-11-12 11:37 AM, Rob Emanuele wrote:
>
>> Hi Jeff,
>>
>> I'm sorry to hear you are being bullied in private messages. It is
>> perhaps best to bring in the Code of Conduct committee to help handle
>> this; direct threats and private bulling tactics seem in violation with
>> the CoC, and there should be steps taken to ensure that our community
>> doesn't have bulling in our midst that goes unaddressed.
>>
>> I'm disappointed that you take LocationTech's core goal as "to promote
>> business and give those businesses a stage". Your point of view and
>> behavior on the lists makes more sense knowing that, though; if you
>> believe that LocationTech is really about promoting the businesses, and
>> not the greater community, then having LocationTech involved in the
>> FOSS4G conferences would diminish the non-business community members'
>> 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Fun Event in Victoria with mix of OSGeo/LocationTech projects

[Jody Garnett]

Certainly.

Last year Rob (who is new to our open source community) volunteered to
chair foss4gna.

I think it is amazing when we have volunteers, especially when they are new
to the community. Indeed my first response is to be careful that in their
enthusiasm a new volunteer does not take on too much and burn out. Based on
my experience I feared setting up a conference was going to qualify as too
much.

I had hoped we would be welcoming, and concerned for his welfare when faced
with such a large task. There were some questions about what was going on,
who LocationTech was, and so forth.

Our strength at OSGeo is being a people powered organization. I had hoped
we would look out for the people (such as Rob) and was embarrassed when we
missed that mark.

Sorry if that is a bit harsh, expressing personal feeling etc...
--
Jody

--
Jody Garnett

On 12 November 2015 at 15:46, Venkatesh Raghavan <
ragha...@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp> wrote:

> Hi Jody,
>
> On 2015/11/12 20:01, Jody Garnett wrote:
>
>> I have gotten a number of private emails expressing concerns about
>> LocationTech being involved in several of the foss4g bids. I guess I had
>> the opposite concern last year when there was the joint OSGeo /
>> LocationTech foss4gna conference. I was kind of embarrassed our behavior
>> as
>> a community - would prefer to see us as welcoming and supportive
>> (especially as we had a first time organizer that could use our support).
>>
>
> Can you clarify what "our" in your e-mail points to?
> I cannot understand "*our* behaviour as a community" and
> "first time organizer that could use *our* support.
>
> Venka
>
> ___
> 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] Fun Event in Victoria with mix of OSGeo/LocationTech projects

[Jody Garnett]

I am glad this thread is encouraging communication.

As stated at the start I would like to do a better job of communication on
this one. I guess I can start by saying the two organizations have a much
stronger relationship than a Memorandum of Understanding. A MoU is often
the first stage of a formal contract, in this case the formal relationship
has been realized.

See http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2012-10-11

The result of this is that OSGeo is a member of LocationTech (see the list
of members here ). And has provided a
representative to the steering committee meetings and speak on behalf of
OSGeo.

(Is this kind of background useful - I feel I am being painfully
obvious/annoying on this one)
--
Jody Garnett

On 12 November 2015 at 11:01, Jody Garnett  wrote:

> I have not done the best at communicating lately, here is a write up from
> a fun event held last month in victoria -
> http://www.how2map.com/2015/10/locationtech-tour-2015.html
>
> A really positive mix of OSGeo and LocationTech projects. In many cases
> this event was the first introduction to open source for those attending -
> making this an excellent outreach opportunity.
>
> I have gotten a number of private emails expressing concerns about
> LocationTech being involved in several of the foss4g bids. I guess I had
> the opposite concern last year when there was the joint OSGeo /
> LocationTech foss4gna conference. I was kind of embarrassed our behavior as
> a community - would prefer to see us as welcoming and supportive
> (especially as we had a first time organizer that could use our support).
>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss