<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi Everyone,<br>
<br>
These are some relevant thoughts more than a direct reply to
Jody's post. Hopefully they help the discussion along.<br>
<br>
Working together, we see good potential for triggering growth,
innovation, and increased mind-share for open source location
technology. Nurturing existing technology is important. We also
want to invest in new & innovative areas not currently
addressed. There are things we can do to help enable organizations
to invest. This is what this is about.<br>
<br>
Projects:<br>
<br>
Simply put, some projects (hosted @ OSGeo or otherwise) will look
at the relative increase in process & formality or something
else and decide it just isn't for them.<br>
<br>
Other projects will be attracted to the opportunity to gain
additional mind-share and energy via. the group @ Eclipse. Eclipse
is ubiquitous and well trusted in places likely to be desirable to
projects and community. This includes organizations, and also
technology areas like enterprise IT, Aerospace, Automotive,
Financial, etc.<br>
<br>
Some projects may decide to be involved in both foundations if
they see a way to so with little downside. Some projects may
decide for neither. Some may feel one way today, and re-evaluate
in the future. <br>
<br>
<br>
Events:<br>
<br>
Collaborating on events seems like a good idea.<br>
<br>
Things work similarly for events between OSGeo & Eclipse. It's
probably fair to say there's less risk and maybe a bit more
consistency @ Eclipse given the dedicated full time staff handling
the logistics and fund raising. Also, we tend to host the main
annual conferences in the same location for a few years at a time
which also helps with risk.<br>
<br>
Here's how a typical EclipseCon/ EclipseCon Europe is run:<br>
The program committee is made up of community members/committers
and invited industry experts.<br>
The logistics such as A/V, Catering, Security, etc. are handled by
a full-time event planning team. <br>
The business team handle sponsorship, accounting, etc. <br>
<br>
In general, for what it's worth, working together doesn't need to
be divisive. Thank you to the team directly involved, the people
discussing the topic here, and especially Michael for going to
great lengths trying to ensure it isn't.<br>
<br>
Directly addressing a few things:<br>
<br>
Q: Will Eclipse become a platinum (or any other level) sponsor of
OSGeo.<br>
A: I can't really say. The Steering Committee of the group will
prioritize their budget based on their goals & how such a
proposal would contribute towards achieving them.<br>
<br>
Q: Will Eclipse work *through* OSGeo.<br>
A: We would like to find a way to work *together* on initiatives
of mutual interest.<br>
<br>
In case you're interested, more FAQ information is posted here:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://wiki.eclipse.org/Location/FAQ">http://wiki.eclipse.org/Location/FAQ</a><br>
<br>
Andrew<br>
<br>
On 06/19/2012 03:55 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:C67931B226F5489FB3E2962EB9DE4823@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite"
style="border-left-style:solid;border-width:1px;margin-left:0px;padding-left:10px;"><span>
<div>
<div>I think that OSGeo should say:<br>
<br>
* OSGeo wants to continue to be the recognised foundation
that Geospatial Open Source projects turn to for support.
In particular, we don't want to see the marketplace split
by choosing between one foundation and another. Such a
slit is likely to create a lot of bad will amongst the
greater community, and lead to reduced productivity which
will not be good for anyone.<br>
</div>
</div>
</span></blockquote>
<div>I don't think we have much danger of that - a choice is not
required. Projects already work with multiple groups (examples
github for hosting; OSGeo for community development; source
forge for file distribution; free software foundation for legal
advice and so on …).</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
style="border-left-style:solid;border-width:1px;margin-left:0px;padding-left:10px;"><span>
<div>
<div> * As such we wish to see the Eclipse Foundation worth
through the OSGeo Foundation.<br>
<br>
If we can get the Eclipse Foundation to agree to the
above, then I think we can continue moving forward with a
positive discussion.<br>
</div>
</div>
</span></blockquote>
<div>Counter proposal here. We have already have a precedent of
working with the OGC on a few activities (an interoperability
day, a white paper and so on, and we maintain a osge-standards
email list to facilitate discussion).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Perhaps we can treat this location working group in a similar
fashion, consider it as an "OSGeo industry outreach" activity
and ask that OSGeo maintain a representative in the group.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Aside: With respect to OGC collaboration, what is the process
the OGC uses to define their open source reference
implementations? Along with cite tests this seems like like an
obvious candidate for direct collaboration.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Jody</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Board@lists.osgeo.org">Board@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<b>Andrew Ross</b><br>
Director, Ecosystems<br>
<a href="http://eclipse.org">Eclipse Foundation</a><br>
Twitter: <a href="http://twitter.com/42aross">@42aross</a><br>
Mobile: 1-613-614-5772<br>
</div>
</body>
</html>