Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 11:39:22AM +0100, Andrea Ross wrote: > It is the viral nature of the GPL & AGPL that keeps projects using > those licenses out if LocationTech & Eclipse for now. It is actually LocationTech and Eclipse keeping those projects out, not any "virus". There's no prescription

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

Andrea, > > It is the viral nature of the GPL & AGPL Just as an aside: as for most people a "virus" is something not very positively connoted, I'd suggest rather refering to the reciprocal or share alike nature of the license to better describe its intent in a way that doesn't assume bad

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

Hi, Are you sure that is a complete list of what the approved licenses are? That would be pretty disappointing if they limit by "name" of the license instead of by "rights". On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Massimiliano Cannata < massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch> wrote: > Sandro, > > from

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 9:41 AM, María Arias de Reyna wrote: > I answer myself, yes, they filter by name. And explicitly forbid GPL licenses: > https://www.locationtech.org/faq-questions-inline > > Which licenses does LocationTech allow? > > The following licenses are

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

Hi Sandro, I agree with you. But I understand that people with less experience on free software are afraid (at the beginning) of freedom. It is a big step to take from closed software and not everyone is willing/brave enough to take it. That's why I say that it is understandable. Not that they

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

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

[OSGeo-Discuss] bitten, anyone ?

Did anyone try the Edgewall (of Trac fame) continuous integration solution ? Would integrate seamlessly to the OSGeo trac instances. An example view (of "bitten" itself): http://bitten.edgewall.org/build/branches-0.6.x The Bitten white paper: http://bitten.edgewall.org/wiki/WhitePaper --strk;

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

Sandro, from https://www.locationtech.org/charter in "IP Management" section: *"... The group will follow the Eclipse Foundation's IP due diligence process in order to provide clean open source software released under licenses approved by the group and the Eclipse Foundation Board of Directors.

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

I answer myself, yes, they filter by name. And explicitly forbid GPL licenses: https://www.locationtech.org/faq-questions-inline Which licenses does LocationTech allow? The following licenses are allowed at LocationTech without special approval: EPL EDL (BSD) MIT Apache v2 Other licenses might

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

I agree, it is always good to collaborate with other organizations, as long as the collaboration is clear, brings mutual benefits are and there are no conflictual goals. Which I think is still a topic for discussion: what is you actual final aim? How do you want to achieve it? Maxi 2015-11-13

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 09:45:23AM +0100, María Arias de Reyna wrote: > And as wrong as they are, if their main focus is on > bussiness, it is understandable they are afraid of freedom. I disagree on this point. I've been make a living out of free software development for over a decade now, and

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

> > I may as well link to my more recent talk (https://vimeo.com/142989259) > as > > Interesting talk Jody, thank you ! > Glad you enjoyed it, afraid I was a bit punch drunk after a long conference. > One thing it wasn't clear to me (I might have dreamt it): > did you say that LocationTech only

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

Comments inline: For me this is a major outrage, but I understand that OSGeo is focused > on open software, not on free software. (Remember: free includes open, > open doesn't include free). > As mentioned in my other email I am pragmatic, focused on what my customers want, or what the community

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

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 <

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

OSGeo vs LocationTech debate aside, I would like to point out that there are lots of people who make the choice of non-reciprocal licenses over reciprocal ones, and it is not by "fear" or because they misunderstand the way FOSS licenses work, it for other reasons that I don't ask pro-freedom

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

Dear Maria, Hopefully the choice of license for a project, or in this case choices for licenses by a group of projects are not cause for outrage. Each project will choose what makes sense to them, and that's a great thing. This is very common. Apache has chosen the Apache license. Mozilla the

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

Thanks Even. Noted. As you likely know. It is the extra nature beyond other reciprocal licenses like LGPL, EPL, and MPL that is the concern. I've not heard a different term to describe that aspect. And it goes without saying no offense was intended. I understand the different perspectives and

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 01:19:20PM +0100, Andrea Ross wrote: > It is the extra nature beyond other reciprocal licenses like LGPL, > EPL, and MPL that is the concern. > I've not heard a different term to describe that aspect. I think "reciprocal" expresses the concept very well, not sure why you

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

Hi Andrea, You seem to value the OSGeo community so much, so much in fact that you would smoothly court all 3 of our bidders for OSGeo's only source of revenue and publicity all year, our beloved global FOSS4G event. It is true that it is "ridiculous", from an organization that (apparently