<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Thanks Steven.<br>
<br>
Agreed. For what it's worth, folks involved with LocationTech
have been talking with the OSGeo board regularly for some time.
Jody serves on both boards currently as just the latest example.
It is my hope that the collegial contact at that level continue.<br>
<br>
In terms of the public discussions, people have asked us to
participate there, and we were & are happy to do so.<br>
<br>
I recognize the concerns for sure. That was the purpose of the
FAQ. Hopefully it provided an easy to read bit of information to
help clear some things up so at least any outstanding concerns are
based on good information.<br>
<br>
Kind regards,<br>
<br>
Andrea<br>
<br>
On 16/11/15 03:57, Steven Feldman wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:27CB0B2A-6746-4971-BB7C-9A57FB782B49@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
Andrea
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Please don’t assume that the lack of response to
your FAQ means that it is widely accepted. </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">I think that you need to recognise the concerns that
have been expressed in the various threads (whether you consider
them valid or not) and seek to address them through discussions
which are almost certainly best held between the officers of LT
and OSGeo not via an email list. </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">The voting period for 2017 is nearly over, once the
result has been announced let’s try to move forward in a
cooperative manner.</div>
<div class="">
<div class="">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse:
separate; line-height: normal; border-spacing: 0px;">______<br
class="">
Steven<br class="">
<br class="">
</span>
</div>
<br class="">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
<br class="">
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">From: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">Andrea Ross
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:andrea.ross@eclipse.org" class="">andrea.ross@eclipse.org</a>><br
class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">Date: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">15 November
2015 at 17:35:37 GMT<br class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">To: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class=""><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:discuss@lists.osgeo.org" class="">discuss@lists.osgeo.org</a><br
class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">Subject: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class=""><b class="">Re:
[OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship</b><br
class="">
</span></div>
<br class="">
<br class="">
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8"
http-equiv="Content-Type" class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Jeff,<br class="">
<br class="">
Again, you make statements like you have below about
me/LocationTech smoothly courting/calculated/etc going
after OSGeo's only source of revenue. Perhaps you
would like to present your evidence for making such
negative statements? <br class="">
<br class="">
Bear in mind that the ample evidence to the contrary
is public. Dave & Robert have told their stories
about how & why they LocationTech as a conference
organizer for their 2017 bids. Michael Terner shared
his story too. There was nothing untoward involved,
and everything has been talked about publicly.<br
class="">
<br class="">
The budget details for those bids are public too and
as generous as a conservative budget allows. The
payment is very much in line with the best payments
ever received from a FOSS4G, and OSGeo is not on the
hook for a loss should one occur.<br class="">
<br class="">
Making such assertions with no evidence to back them
up, against much evidence to the contrary is unfounded
and very unprofessional.<br class="">
<br class="">
The <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/15x1Q3J9OPM95jEkeZhYlU0xB5uO9V9NCOI28g5B_Yqc/edit"
class="">FAQ we published</a> publicly makes the
motives very clear. People like myself, Dave
McIlhagga, Jody Garnett, and many others have been
deeply involved in OSGeo & FOSS4G since the
beginning in many capacities. (so were the Founders of
LocationTech for what that's worth) All of what we
have done is public record. We never left the
community. We care about FOSS4G and care how it is
run. We are valued members of the FOSS4G & OSGeo
communities, have equal right to participate, and not
the invading outsiders you are attempting to portray
us as.<br class="">
<br class="">
Again, you imply something untoward regarding why
LocationTech was founded and exists. It was created
& exists to fill a gap. And 3 years on it is doing
a pretty good job of that. As I have said, I am not
aware of any harm to OSGeo that has come from
LocationTech. There was much goodness specified
clearly in the FAQ stating plainly how LocationTech
has helped OSGeo. You are welcome to share your
evidence to the contrary.<br class="">
<br class="">
As just one more example we didn't put in the FAQ,
after a very successful FOSS4G NA 2015, $6K USD was
paid to OSGeo from LocationTech to help support it.
The money was provided with no strings attached for
OSGeo to spend how it see's fit.<br class="">
<br class="">
Collaboration happens between OSGeo & LocationTech
every day without fuss. People shuffle back and forth
across the imaginary border without even thinking
about it. It is one ecosystem.<br class="">
<br class="">
I wish you'd see & acknowledge the goodness and
positive things from LocationTech. At the very least,
without any evidence of anything negative, you should
really stop.<br class="">
<br class="">
Andrea<br class="">
<br class="">
On 13/11/15 14:24, Jeff McKenna wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:5645E488.8020806@gatewaygeomatics.com"
type="cite" class="">Hi Andrea, <br class="">
<br class="">
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 formerly) focused on
commerce, to ask OSGeo to pay you (90,000 USD), to
take control of OSGeo's only event (worth 1,000,000
USD), and then think that this is a fine since you
offer (my answer: a polite no thank you) of handling
losses for OSGeo's FOSS4G event, in maybe one of the
strongest regions for attendees in the world? If we
are speaking of commerce, this doesn't make sense. <br
class="">
<br class="">
I think Maxi said it well, that we all are trying to
understand your motives here. How about an MoU
together, exchange of official letters, big press
release, creating a working group of half LocationTech
and half OSGeo board members, an exchange of talks at
each others events, become the sustaining sponsor of
OSGeo; instead, here we are. <br class="">
<br class="">
If you value the OSGeo community so much, why would
you create a separate foundation with the exact same
goals, and then later come back to the other
foundation saying "no, we love you. Give us the right
to run your event". Ha, pardon? <br class="">
<br class="">
-jeff <br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
On 2015-11-12 7:35 PM, Andrea Ross wrote: <br
class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Jeff, <br class="">
<br class="">
It is really hard to discuss this topic because you
make stuff up. The <br class="">
concerns stem from the fantasy rather than reality.
<br class="">
<br class="">
The FAQ produced recently <br class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/15x1Q3J9OPM95jEkeZhYlU0xB5uO9V9NCOI28g5B_Yqc/edit?usp=drive_web"><https://docs.google.com/document/d/15x1Q3J9OPM95jEkeZhYlU0xB5uO9V9NCOI28g5B_Yqc/edit?usp=drive_web></a>
<br class="">
does a pretty good job covering the situation. <br
class="">
<br class="">
In 3 years, so far as I know, absolutely no harm has
come to OSGeo as a <br class="">
result of LocationTech, and certainly not from any
official/intentional <br class="">
actions. On the contrary, there's a nice body of
ever growing benefits. <br class="">
<br class="">
Regarding your new claims: <br class="">
<br class="">
* The press releases & charter for
LocationTech have not changed. <br class="">
They're all still up where they always were and
haven't been <br class="">
modified. (seriously?!) <br class="">
* LocationTech & OSGeo have had formal
relations for some time as Jody <br class="">
notes. There is all kinds of collaboration
happening frequently and <br class="">
people are fine with it. <br class="">
* We gave many examples in the FAQ about
LocationTech helping OSGeo. <br class="">
I'm not even sure that (positive list) was
calculated necessarily as <br class="">
much as things that arise matter of course from
the things the group <br class="">
does. <br class="">
* The evidence is for all to see in the bid
proposals, LocationTech <br class="">
has offered to cover losses and promising
payments on par with the <br class="">
best payments from past FOSS4G's. The numbers
are based on a <br class="">
conservative budget. When you also factor that
LocationTech has <br class="">
sponsored in which money has flowed to OSGeo,
your claims <br class="">
LocationTech is setting sights on OSGeo income
are even more ridiculous. <br class="">
* As Jody & others have noted, the Tour is
something that was born out <br class="">
of LocationTech. It is inclusive to any who want
to participate. The <br class="">
FAQ covers why LocationTech members &
projects care about FOSS4G, <br class="">
and it's very reasonable. <br class="">
<br class="">
It's worth saying that people involved with
LocationTech have also been <br class="">
involved with OSGeo for some time. Your efforts to
portray them as <br class="">
outsiders is bogus. They are as welcome as anyone
else to participate. <br class="">
<br class="">
I'm not sure what else to say. It's such shame to
have this be <br class="">
needlessly misrepresented. <br class="">
<br class="">
Andrea <br class="">
<br class="">
On 12/11/15 21:58, Jeff McKenna wrote: <br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Hi Cameron, <br
class="">
<br class="">
I am also glad to speak of this publicly, this is
a very important topic. <br class="">
<br class="">
I have been thinking more and more about Rob's
response (thank you so <br class="">
much Rob for taking the time to speak with me on
that). I will speak <br class="">
honestly here again, and I don't mean to offend: <br
class="">
<br class="">
I am now left with a realization that, what I
always thought of <br class="">
LocationTech as created to help
commercially-friendly geospatial <br class="">
software, is wrong. I always just assumed that
they filled a nice <br class="">
hole in the equation, by focusing on business
needs. As was pointed <br class="">
out to me today, their goals now are in fact the
exact same as <br class="">
OSGeo's. In fact, I have to really dig now for
the LocationTech's <br class="">
former tagline of "commercially-friendly.." on
their website, but I <br class="">
found the initial press releases for LocationTech
and there it is in <br class="">
the second sentence, and then entire paragraphs on
that goal. Did <br class="">
something change there that I missed? <br
class="">
<br class="">
So now, yes, I am confused. <br class="">
<br class="">
And no wonder that, from those initial 2012/2013
press releases from <br class="">
LocationTech, fast forward to 2015 and they are
contacting each of our <br class="">
3 bidding teams for FOSS4G 2017, I'm left with a
sense of surprise and <br class="">
shock. The overlap exists, we are the same
foundation, and, to make <br class="">
matters more pressing, LocationTech has politely
declined any interest <br class="">
in creating their own global event for their
community, and set their <br class="">
sights on OSGeo's only real source of revenue and
global publicity, <br class="">
our yearly FOSS4G event. Now the pressure is on,
as this 2017 <br class="">
discussion involves huge money, finances, brands,
people's jobs, two <br class="">
communities, and our beloved FOSS4G event that we
have painfully built <br class="">
to be a global brand. And yes passions are
flowing, strong words of <br class="">
"fear", "bullying", "muck" are being dropped, and
I have no doubt <br class="">
someone soon will say "inclusive" or "exclusive",
and then "code of <br class="">
conduct", oh let's not forget "trademark" and even
"lawyer" (to be <br class="">
honest, in the past week I've heard each of these
words about this <br class="">
topic). It's all an absolute mess, if you ask my
opinion. <br class="">
<br class="">
My vision is to work with foundations and
organizations all around the <br class="">
world, locally or globally. OSGeo has done a
great job on this, <br class="">
through our (admittedly slow process for some
people) of MoUs, and <br class="">
building those relationships through designated
committees or special <br class="">
sessions at FOSS4G events. <br class="">
<br class="">
This sudden thrust of LocationTech, by contacting
each of our 3 <br class="">
bidders for 2017, is very calculated on their
side, but on OSGeo's <br class="">
side, this is a hard pill to swallow so fast. <br
class="">
<br class="">
I actually don't think it is OSGeo that should be
the ones talking <br class="">
now. We haven't changed, we have always put on
FOSS4G each year, <br class="">
moving around the globe. We put community first
and foremost, our <br class="">
community is very strong. I think our community
is what attracts <br class="">
LocationTech to OSGeo, why they strategically
contacted each 2017 <br class="">
bidders, but I'd love to hear it from their
mouths. <br class="">
<br class="">
So I don't believe it is OSGeo that should be the
ones explaining <br class="">
ourselves now. I think this is the time for
LocationTech to explain <br class="">
their vision, how it has changed over the years,
and how it sees <br class="">
itself in the ecosystem, because OSGeo has been
around now a long time <br class="">
and their is no confusion about OSGeo. <br
class="">
<br class="">
In regards to the current situation, I wish we
could start with an <br class="">
MoU, work slowly on building a relationship, do
not strategically <br class="">
contact bidders or groups on either side, but work
together on <br class="">
building this ecosystem - maybe offering each
other a "topic talk" <br class="">
extended session at each of our events, maybe
discussing becoming a <br class="">
sustaining sponsor of each other's foundation,
maybe having a shared <br class="">
"working group" on this involving both
LocationTech and OSGeo board <br class="">
members. <br class="">
<br class="">
I've done a lot of writing the last couple of
days. I hope this at <br class="">
least helps explain what is on my mind. <br
class="">
<br class="">
Oh, as some privately enjoy writing to me and
saying I am wrong, well <br class="">
yes, I am often wrong, but at least I am speaking
publicly, and trying <br class="">
so hard always to make sure that OSGeo and FOSS4G
are properly <br class="">
represented. <br class="">
<br class="">
-jeff <br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
On 2015-11-12 4:04 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote: <br
class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Hi Jeff, Venka,
Jody, Rob, <br class="">
<br class="">
Thanks for initiating this discussion and
starting to put ideas out for <br class="">
public discussion. <br class="">
<br class="">
Jeff, Venka, I get the impression from your
emails that you are <br class="">
concerned that LocationTech might "steal"
community mind-share, and in <br class="">
particular take control of key OSGeo tasks such
as FOSS4G and in the <br class="">
process change focus of FOSS4G into a more
commercial event, which <br class="">
increases prices, and looses core community
driven focus. Am I right? Or <br class="">
could you please clarify. <br class="">
<br class="">
For the record, at the time I was disappointed
at the time that Location <br class="">
Tech was created, and the functionality of
Location Tech didn't get <br class="">
created under the umbrella of OSGeo. However
both organisations exist <br class="">
now, and I can see that in moving forward that
both organisations can <br class="">
exist successfully together and complement each
other. (+1 to Rob's <br class="">
comments). <br class="">
<br class="">
A few years back, when both Jeff and I were on
the board, we co-authored <br class="">
"Board Priorities" [1]. (Ok, I did a lot of
writing, but the board did <br class="">
contribute and sign off on it). Prior boards
have similarly outlined <br class="">
OSGeo's priorities which have been embedded in
our official documents. <br class="">
The "Board Priorities" include focus on OSGeo
acting as a "low capital, <br class="">
volunteer focused organisation", and acknowledge
that a the role of the <br class="">
"high capital" business model is better
accomplished by LocationTech. <br class="">
<br class="">
Jeff, Venka, Jody and others on the board, what
is your vision for <br class="">
OSGeo's future direction, and in particular,
what is your vision for a <br class="">
future relationship with Location Tech? Should
OSGeo revise our focus <br class="">
and goals? It might help to start by being
specific. What should OSGeo <br class="">
take responsibility for? What should Location
Tech take responsibility <br class="">
for? Are the organisations appropriately
structured and resourced to <br class="">
take on that responsibility? If not, what should
change to make that <br class="">
happen? <br class="">
<br class="">
With regards to private (and threatening
emails), I suggest replying <br class="">
with something like: <br class="">
"Thanks for your comments, you have some valid
concerns. I'd like to <br class="">
respond to your suggestions publicly so others
can join in and we can <br class="">
deal with your suggestions appropriately. Is it
ok if I do so?" <br class="">
If you don't get the ok, don't deal with the
suggestion. But I suggest <br class="">
refrain from implication of bullying as it
implies that LocationTech is <br class="">
playing dirty tactics, which reflects badly on
LocationTech and OSGeo as <br class="">
it suggests that the two organisations are
unable to resolve issues <br class="">
professionally. (I'm hoping that mentioned
"bullying" is just a case of <br class="">
some people getting a bit more passionate that
maybe they should). <br class="">
<br class="">
Warm regards, Cameron <br class="">
<br class="">
[1] <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_of_Directors#Board_Priorities">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_of_Directors#Board_Priorities</a>
<br class="">
<br class="">
On 13/11/2015 3:53 am, Rob Emanuele wrote: <br
class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Hi Jeff, <br
class="">
<br class="">
You are right, commercial-friendliness
certainly does play a part in <br class="">
LocationTech. The way I've seen that enacted
is by the use of the <br class="">
Eclipse Foundation's legal department to
ensure that the projects <br class="">
which are supported by LocationTech are
declared by a legal team to be <br class="">
free of proprietary or wrongly-licensed code.
In this way, commercial <br class="">
entities can use the projects with some
assurance that they will not <br class="">
be sued down the line for code that was not
actually open in the way <br class="">
they thought it was. <br class="">
<br class="">
Also, there is a steering committee that makes
decisions about how the <br class="">
budget will be used. The budget mainly
consists of member company's <br class="">
dues. The members of the steering committee
are decided by membership <br class="">
level (large membership gets representation on
the steering committee) <br class="">
as well as a lower-membership level elected
committee. There is also <br class="">
representation by the developers, who vote
independently of any <br class="">
company and are there to represent the
committers on the project. For <br class="">
more information, you can read through some
links here: <br class="">
<br class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.locationtech.org/charter">https://www.locationtech.org/charter</a>
<br class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.locationtech.org/election2015">https://www.locationtech.org/election2015</a>
<br class="">
<br class="">
In practice, as a maintainer of an open source
project and developer, <br class="">
what LocationTech has meant to me is support
for my project in ways <br class="">
that are not centered around business. To me
it's been a place where <br class="">
I've gotten to collaborate with similar open
source projects and have <br class="">
my project be promoted through events and
other channels; for instance <br class="">
I participate in Google Summer of Code and
Facebook Open Academy as a <br class="">
mentor through the Eclipse Foundation. Perhaps
these are needs that <br class="">
can also be served by OSGeo, but they have in
practice been met by <br class="">
LocationTech. From my perspective as a project
lead and open source <br class="">
developer, that there are multiple channels
that can potentially <br class="">
support me and my project is a great thing and
signs of a healthy <br class="">
domain. <br class="">
<br class="">
I did not start LocationTech. So for me it's
not a question of, why <br class="">
should LocationTech be created when there is
already OSGeo; <br class="">
LocationTech already exists, and I don't think
it's up to me to <br class="">
question it's existence. Nor do I think it's a
useful exercise to <br class="">
question the existence of something that
clearly has support and is <br class="">
supporting others. I can only decide which
organizations I believe in <br class="">
and support, and what I can get out of those
organizations as far as <br class="">
them supporting me. So on a personal level, my
thoughts are that both <br class="">
OSGeo and LocationTech are good organizations.
I'd like to find ways <br class="">
to support both organizations, and find ways
both organizations can <br class="">
support me and my project. <br class="">
<br class="">
On a more general level, I'm against
centralization. Having diversity <br class="">
in governance structures, funding models and
support channels is a <br class="">
good thing, and I don't want there to be only
one "true" organization <br class="">
that I can look to for support. However, like
I mentioned, the ideal <br class="">
would be that those organizations could figure
out how to use their <br class="">
difference skill sets to work together on
making the community as a <br class="">
whole move forward. And that is what I am
hoping OSGeo and <br class="">
LocationTech can do (as well as any other
related organizations). <br class="">
<br class="">
Jody did a talk at FOSS4G NA 2015 on some of
the differences between <br class="">
LocationTech and OSGeo, I recommend it: <br
class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://youtu.be/sdpEa6XdQEo">https://youtu.be/sdpEa6XdQEo</a>
<br class="">
<br class="">
Best, <br class="">
Rob <br class="">
<br class="">
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Jeff McKenna
<br class="">
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com">jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com"><mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com></a>>
<br class="">
wrote: <br class="">
<br class="">
Hi Rob, <br class="">
<br class="">
Thank you for your very thoughtful
response. You summarize the <br class="">
situation very well. I think talking
openly like this on this <br class="">
topic, is the only way to make this all
work. <br class="">
<br class="">
It sounds like I am wrong about
LocationTech's goals; at the same <br
class="">
time then, if that is the case, that
LocationTech is not about <br class="">
commerce (doesn't "commercially friendly"
encourage business <br class="">
interest?), then what was the need to
create a separate new <br class="">
foundation, also focused on growing Open
Source geospatial <br class="">
software? <br class="">
<br class="">
I hope we can speak openly here Rob, I do
not mean any disrespect <br class="">
to you personally or to LocationTech (some
take it personal). <br class="">
Please share here the reasons you see to
have 2 foundations <br class="">
focused on the same goal. <br class="">
<br class="">
Thanks, <br class="">
<br class="">
-jeff <br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
On 2015-11-12 11:37 AM, Rob Emanuele
wrote: <br class="">
<br class="">
Hi Jeff, <br class="">
<br class="">
I'm sorry to hear you are being
bullied in private messages. <br class="">
It is <br class="">
perhaps best to bring in the Code of
Conduct committee to help <br class="">
handle <br class="">
this; direct threats and private
bulling tactics seem in <br class="">
violation with <br class="">
the CoC, and there should be steps
taken to ensure that our <br class="">
community <br class="">
doesn't have bulling in our midst that
goes unaddressed. <br class="">
<br class="">
I'm disappointed that you take
LocationTech's core goal as "to <br class="">
promote <br class="">
business and give those businesses a
stage". Your point of <br class="">
view and <br class="">
behavior on the lists makes more sense
knowing that, though; <br class="">
if you <br class="">
believe that LocationTech is really
about promoting the <br class="">
businesses, and <br class="">
not the greater community, then having
LocationTech involved <br class="">
in the <br class="">
FOSS4G conferences would diminish the
non-business community <br class="">
members' <br class="">
role in the conference, which would be
a Bad thing. However, <br class="">
as a member <br class="">
of the LocationTech PMC and someone
who was/is involved in the <br class="">
FOSS4G NA <br class="">
2015 and FOSS4G NA 2016 process, as
well as someone involved <br class="">
in the <br class="">
FOSS4G 2017 Philadelphia bid, I want
to assure you that is not <br class="">
the case. <br class="">
<br class="">
There is real focus and real work
being done at LocationTech <br class="">
to help the <br class="">
community of developers and users of
FOSS4G. In this instance <br class="">
I'm using <br class="">
FOSS4G for what the acronym actually
means, Free and Open <br class="">
Source <br class="">
Software for Geospatial, not referring
to the conference <br class="">
that has <br class="">
captured that name. Both LocationTech
and OSGeo exist to <br class="">
support FOSS4G, <br class="">
and the greater community (greater
then both of those <br class="">
organizations) <br class="">
that use and develop FOSS4G. There are
differences in the <br class="">
organizations <br class="">
for sure, and I think highlighting
those differences and really <br class="">
understanding how they serve the
community in different ways is <br class="">
important. The ideal scenario that I
see is that both <br class="">
organizations <br class="">
would use those differences to
collaborate and have a <br class="">
sum-greater-than-it's-parts type of
support system for FOSS4G. <br class="">
Instead, <br class="">
we have a situation where there's
distrust, finger pointing, <br class="">
and <br class="">
political "power plays" against each
other. We have the <br class="">
president of one <br class="">
of the organizations characterizing
the core goal of the other <br class="">
organization in a dangerously wrong
way. We have decisions and <br class="">
discussions about a million dollar
revenue generating <br class="">
conference focused <br class="">
on that million dollars, rather then
how to ensure that <br class="">
conference does <br class="">
the best job possible at supporting
and pushing forward the <br class="">
community. <br class="">
We have the precious resource that is
the energy of volunteers <br class="">
being <br class="">
spent on political infighting rather
than on collaboration <br class="">
towards <br class="">
serving the community. I'm not sure
the best path forward for <br class="">
this, but <br class="">
I want to declare that the situation
as I see it is bad for the <br class="">
community, collaboration between OSGeo
and LocationTech would <br class="">
be good <br class="">
for the community, and I hope as a
whole we can move towards <br class="">
that better <br class="">
future. <br class="">
<br class="">
I hear your concerns for the price of
the FOSS4G NA tickets, <br class="">
though I'll <br class="">
point out to people who are following
along that it's not as <br class="">
simple as a <br class="">
flat $1000 dollar rate. I encourage
you to look at the <br class="">
registration <br class="">
pricing breakdown when it's published
for FOSS4G NA 2016, be <br class="">
sure to <br class="">
apply for a non-corporate pass if you
will not be reimbursed <br class="">
by a <br class="">
company, and to apply for a
scholarship if the cost is still <br class="">
too high. <br class="">
Also, if you are giving a talk,
registration is free, so <br class="">
please submit! <br class="">
The Call For Proposals is now open <br
class="">
(<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="https://2016.foss4g-na.org/cfp"><https://2016.foss4g-na.org/cfp></a><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://2016.foss4g-na.org/cfp">https://2016.foss4g-na.org/cfp</a>).
<br class="">
Jeff, your presence was missed at
FOSS4G NA 2015 and I hope <br class="">
that you can <br class="">
come to Raleigh for FOSS4G NA 2016. <br
class="">
<br class="">
Best, <br class="">
Rob <br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Jeff
McKenna <br class="">
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com">jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com</a>
<br class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com"><mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com></a>
<br class="">
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com">mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com</a>
<br class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com"><mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com></a>>>
<br class="">
<br class="">
wrote: <br class="">
<br class="">
On 2015-11-12 7:01 AM, Jody
Garnett wrote: <br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
I have gotten a number of
private emails expressing <br class="">
concerns about <br class="">
LocationTech being involved in
several of the foss4g <br class="">
bids. I <br class="">
guess I had <br class="">
the opposite concern last year
when there was the <br class="">
joint OSGeo / <br class="">
LocationTech foss4gna
conference. I was kind of <br class="">
embarrassed our <br class="">
behavior <br class="">
as a community - would prefer
to see us as welcoming <br class="">
and supportive <br class="">
(especially as we had a first
time organizer that <br class="">
could use our <br class="">
support). <br class="">
<br class="">
Hi Jody, <br class="">
<br class="">
I am very glad that you brought
this up publicly. Lately I <br class="">
too have <br class="">
received very disturbing direct
emails, containing threats <br class="">
of "if <br class="">
this happens you watch" "karma you
watch yourself" "if we <br class="">
lose you <br class="">
watch out" and direct bullying
tactics, for speaking my <br class="">
mind on this <br class="">
issue. The same people sending
these threats will not <br class="">
speak <br class="">
publicly on this, so I have asked
them to stop sending me <br class="">
these <br class="">
messages, but the messages
continue, so I have stopped <br class="">
answering <br class="">
them. These are "power-play"
emails sent directly to me, <br class="">
but I will <br class="">
tell them here publicly, bullying
me will not stop me from <br class="">
speaking <br class="">
openly about OSGeo's one event all
year, the global <br class="">
FOSS4G. (for <br class="">
those not following the 2017
conference discussions, you <br class="">
would have <br class="">
to read a long thread to get
caught up <br class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Call-to-discuss-FOSS4G-2017-proposals-prior-to-voting-td5234235.html">http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Call-to-discuss-FOSS4G-2017-proposals-prior-to-voting-td5234235.html</a>).
<br class="">
<br class="">
As someone just wrote last night
on another list, likely <br class="">
there would <br class="">
be no one else that has attended
more FOSS4G events, <br class="">
regional, <br class="">
global, anything, than myself. I
make a point of going to <br class="">
a FOSS4G <br class="">
event, to help grow the local
community, no matter what <br class="">
size of the <br class="">
event or where it is. Lately in
my FOSS4G travels I have <br class="">
noticed a <br class="">
return to our FOSS4G roots, where
the popular events are <br class="">
very low <br class="">
cost, aimed at developers, users,
students, researchers, <br class="">
and the <br class="">
smaller companies trying to make a
living (a great recent <br class="">
example is <br class="">
the FOSS4G-Como event this past
July). Getting back to <br class="">
the topic of <br class="">
your message: I too have been
embarrassed by recent <br class="">
FOSS4G-NorthAmerica events; I was
shocked to see the <br class="">
1,000 USD <br class="">
registration fee there. <br
class="">
<br class="">
But I was not too upset, because
no one is traveling the <br class="">
small <br class="">
FOSS4Gs like me to see the
difference, and I didn't see <br class="">
complaints <br class="">
voiced from the local
NorthAmerican community. LocationTech <br
class="">
involved in FOSS4G-NA is a good
thing, to promote business <br class="">
and give <br class="">
those businesses a stage; the core
goal of LocationTech. <br class="">
<br class="">
However now we are in the process
for deciding the global <br class="">
FOSS4G <br class="">
event for 2017, OSGeo's flagship
event, attended by the <br class="">
international community, and we
must be very careful. <br class="">
Working with <br class="">
foundations is good (hence all of
OSGeo's great MoUs), and <br class="">
I'll use <br class="">
the upcoming example that the 2016
team is considering, <br class="">
giving <br class="">
LocationTech a 90 minute slot in
the program for their <br class="">
projects (and <br class="">
the same for OSGeo, UN, likely
OGC, and other <br class="">
organizations). This <br class="">
is a wonderful way for OSGeo's
FOSS4G event to involve <br class="">
other <br class="">
organizations. I hope that
LocationTech will also give <br class="">
OSGeo a 90 <br class="">
minute slot in their big
conference someday as well; this <br class="">
would be <br class="">
exactly what I see as best-case
scenario. <br class="">
<br class="">
On the other hand, not signing an
MoU, and then just <br class="">
contacting all <br class="">
of our 2017 bidders, is quite a
different method to get <br class="">
to the <br class="">
table. Instead of a long-standing
MoU agreement that would <br class="">
foster <br class="">
the relationship throughout the
years, as we have with <br class="">
so many <br class="">
organizations, we are faced with a
decision now that <br class="">
involves both <br class="">
foundations and 1,000,000 USD (the
annual FOSS4G event <br class="">
generates a <br class="">
lot of revenue, making this very
attractive to professional <br class="">
conference companies all over the
world, I was phoned <br class="">
yesterday by <br class="">
one from Europe, for example).
The money is there, huge <br class="">
money, and <br class="">
huge exposure for these
companies. And their jobs are on <br
class="">
the line, <br class="">
in their minds. Hence this
situation we are forced to <br class="">
deal with <br class="">
now, and these nasty private
messages being sent to me. <br class="">
<br class="">
Let's try to remain positive
though, as we have 3 great <br class="">
bids for <br class="">
FOSS4G 2017, and a solid team
working hard already to make <br class="">
FOSS4G-2016 in Bonn another
amazing event. OSGeo has <br class="">
never been so <br class="">
active and vibrant as so many
initiatives and location <br class="">
chapters grow <br class="">
all around the world. <br
class="">
<br class="">
Thanks for listening, and thank
you Jody for bringing this <br class="">
topic to <br class="">
the public lists. <br class="">
<br class="">
-jeff <br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
-- <br class="">
Jeff McKenna <br class="">
President, OSGeo <br class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna</a>
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
</div>
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">From: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">Howard Butler
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:howard@hobu.co" class="">howard@hobu.co</a>><br
class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">Date: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">15 November
2015 at 17:38:44 GMT<br class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">To: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">"Jürgen E.
Fischer" <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jef@norbit.de" class="">jef@norbit.de</a>><br
class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">Cc: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class=""><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:discuss@lists.osgeo.org" class="">discuss@lists.osgeo.org</a>,
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:osgeo4w-dev@lists.osgeo.org" class="">osgeo4w-dev@lists.osgeo.org</a><br
class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">Subject: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class=""><b class="">Re:
[OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo4W orphaned?</b><br class="">
</span></div>
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">On Nov 14, 2015, at 5:36
PM, Jürgen E. Fischer <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jef@norbit.de" class="">jef@norbit.de</a>>
wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
Hi Helmut,<br class="">
<br class="">
On Sat, 14. Nov 2015 at 23:18:36 +0100, Helmut
Kudrnovsky wrote:<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Is OSGeo4W orphaned? <br
class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
No. But it's mostly only getting updates on GRASS (but
only 32bit) and QGIS.<br class="">
Dependencies are usually only updated if required. And
I'm not sure if<br class="">
everything in OSGeo4W is ready to work with GDAL 2 (IIRC
OTB doesn't support<br class="">
GDAL 2 yet).<br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
No, not orphaned. PDAL also uses OSGeo4W64 as its main
Windows distribution mechanism. <br class="">
<br class="">
It may be a bit early to jump on the "GDAL 2.x+ only"
packaging scenario, especially for many packages. Maybe we
should explore keeping 1.x and 2.x GDAL separate for a
while as the packages slowly catch up. Not ideal, I know.<br
class="">
<br class="">
Howard<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">From: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">Andrea Ross
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:andrea.ross@eclipse.org" class="">andrea.ross@eclipse.org</a>><br
class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">Date: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">15 November
2015 at 17:48:16 GMT<br class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">To: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class=""><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:discuss@lists.osgeo.org" class="">discuss@lists.osgeo.org</a><br
class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">Subject: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class=""><b class="">Re:
[OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship</b><br
class="">
</span></div>
<br class="">
<br class="">
On 13/11/15 15:42, Mateusz Loskot wrote:<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">On 13 November 2015 at
14:24, Jeff McKenna<br class="">
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com" class="">jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com</a>>
wrote:<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">why would you create a
separate<br class="">
foundation with the exact same goals, and then later
come back to the other<br class="">
foundation saying "no, we love you. Give us the right
to run your event".<br class="">
</blockquote>
Bang!<br class="">
<br class="">
Jeff, thank you.<br class="">
<br class="">
Best regards,<br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
Jeff, Mateusz<br class="">
<br class="">
I have answered this in my other email but I'll repeat
here too in case it's helpful. LocationTech was founded,
by many of the same founders and champions of OSGeo, to
fill a gap. It has done a pretty good job of this. A bunch
of what it does, isn't getting done elsewhere and is
needed. None of this was intended to harm OSGeo in any
way, and so far as I can see, hasn't even after 3 years.
Feel free to provide any evidence you can offer to the
contrary.<br class="">
<br class="">
People can and do participate in both OSGeo &
LocationTech all the time. This is a good thing. It
absolutely isn't a zero sum scenario. The mutually
reinforce each other rather than detract from one another.<br
class="">
<br class="">
Apache existed before OSGeo so the same argument could be
used there. While I can see how it plays to emotions, I'm
not sure it's a useful argument.<br class="">
<br class="">
Andrea<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">From: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">Massimiliano
Cannata <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:massimiliano.cannata@supsi.ch" class="">massimiliano.cannata@supsi.ch</a>><br
class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">Date: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">15 November
2015 at 19:05:51 GMT<br class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">To: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">Andrea Ross
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:andrea.ross@eclipse.org" class="">andrea.ross@eclipse.org</a>><br
class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">Cc: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">OSGeo
Discussions <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:discuss@lists.osgeo.org" class="">discuss@lists.osgeo.org</a>><br
class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">Subject: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class=""><b class="">Re:
[OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship</b><br
class="">
</span></div>
<br class="">
<br class="">
<p dir="ltr" class="">Andrea<br class="">
Nevertheless in my simple and neligible opinion and
understanding OSGeo never wanted to organize any apache
event.</p>
<p dir="ltr" class="">If valuable OSGeo members want to
host and organize foss4g they can certainly do in their
name or in the name of their local chapters leaving out
LocationTech from the bussines. If LT want to be at the
osgeo event they can send proposal and see if they will
be accepted and then they are always welcome as a
sponsor.</p>
<p dir="ltr" class="">If we can see that "osgeo" and LT
are "sister" organizations then LT could also have a
free both and be listed as partner along with other
organizations.</p>
<p dir="ltr" class="">Otherwayaround why LT does not
organize its own event and then let it be organized by
osgeo?</p>
<p dir="ltr" class="">Regards<br class="">
Massimiliano</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">Il 15/Nov/2015 18:48, "Andrea
Ross" <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:andrea.ross@eclipse.org" class="">andrea.ross@eclipse.org</a>>
ha scritto:<br type="attribution" class="">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On
13/11/15 15:42, Mateusz Loskot wrote:<br class="">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On 13 November 2015 at 14:24, Jeff McKenna<br
class="">
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com"
target="_blank" class="">jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com</a>>
wrote:<br class="">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
why would you create a separate<br class="">
foundation with the exact same goals, and then
later come back to the other<br class="">
foundation saying "no, we love you. Give us the
right to run your event".<br class="">
</blockquote>
Bang!<br class="">
<br class="">
Jeff, thank you.<br class="">
<br class="">
Best regards,<br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
Jeff, Mateusz<br class="">
<br class="">
I have answered this in my other email but I'll repeat
here too in case it's helpful. LocationTech was
founded, by many of the same founders and champions of
OSGeo, to fill a gap. It has done a pretty good job of
this. A bunch of what it does, isn't getting done
elsewhere and is needed. None of this was intended to
harm OSGeo in any way, and so far as I can see, hasn't
even after 3 years. Feel free to provide any evidence
you can offer to the contrary.<br class="">
<br class="">
People can and do participate in both OSGeo &
LocationTech all the time. This is a good thing. It
absolutely isn't a zero sum scenario. The mutually
reinforce each other rather than detract from one
another.<br class="">
<br class="">
Apache existed before OSGeo so the same argument could
be used there. While I can see how it plays to
emotions, I'm not sure it's a useful argument.<br
class="">
<br class="">
Andrea<br class="">
<br class="">
_______________________________________________<br
class="">
Discuss mailing list<br class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Discuss@lists.osgeo.org"
target="_blank" class="">Discuss@lists.osgeo.org</a><br
class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a></blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">From: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">Jeff McKenna
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com" class="">jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com</a>><br
class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">Date: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">15 November
2015 at 19:21:06 GMT<br class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">To: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class=""><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:discuss@lists.osgeo.org" class="">discuss@lists.osgeo.org</a><br
class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">Subject: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class=""><b class="">Re:
[OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship</b><br
class="">
</span></div>
<br class="">
<br class="">
Anne don't yell at me, I forgot to mention you, I should
have stated "This year's board has the most women ever",
not first! :)<br class="">
<br class="">
I am smiling. Sorry Anne!<br class="">
<br class="">
-jeff<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
On 2015-11-15 3:13 PM, Jeff McKenna wrote:<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Hi Cameron,<br class="">
<br class="">
Thank you for your message. It is very refreshing to
speak on this<br class="">
topic openly here, as others would rather send me strong
private<br class="">
messages questioning my sanity, and making threats. I
realize that many<br class="">
cannot be open on this topic for various reasons.<br
class="">
<br class="">
Let me assure everyone here that I only have one agenda,
which is very<br class="">
rare these days, and that is to help the OSGeo
foundation. I am not<br class="">
muzzled by fear or threats, and I will stand up for the
OSGeo foundation<br class="">
whenever that is required. If by standing up for
OSGeo's only event all<br class="">
year, FOSS4G, means that I am called "confrontational"
and<br class="">
"obstructive", then yes you are fully right.<br class="">
<br class="">
Some may not know this by reading this thread, but I
have always been a<br class="">
big supporter of LocationTech. I was involved in the
beginning of<br class="">
LocationTech, involved in the sense of being one of the
first<br class="">
subscribers to their mailing list, and I even have had
many chats inside<br class="">
their #locationtech IRC channel, even answering
questions from new<br class="">
LocationTech community members (technical readers will
find it<br class="">
interesting to join their IRC channel now on freenode
and see the first<br class="">
message that is displayed when entering their channel
"LocationTech:<br class="">
location aware open source software friendly to
commercialization."). I<br class="">
have followed the development of that organization right
from the<br class="">
beginning, where they smartly filled a void by aiming at
the<br class="">
business/commercial side of Open Source geospatial (of
course, recently<br class="">
they publicly pointed out to me, even questioned my
sanity, that this<br class="">
was false, I am dreaming, that they have always focused
instead on the<br class="">
same goals as OSGeo, but readers, do a google search for
LT and press<br class="">
release, and you will see their early visions). Which
is why I asked<br class="">
now to hear the vision of LocationTech (I was not
answered, but someone<br class="">
else pointed to an FAQ just made). In any case, no I am
not insane, I<br class="">
have always followed LocationTech closely.<br class="">
<br class="">
I do travel to many OSGeo local chapters around the
world, constantly,<br class="">
and especially to developing areas that are just
becoming interested in<br class="">
Open Source. In a few days I will again take 3 more
planes and<br class="">
represent OSGeo at a growing community, again putting
life on hold,<br class="">
including my health, my money, and my life in general,
to go help grow<br class="">
the OSGeo community. In this event I can bet that I
will speak<br class="">
personally to over 100 developers, students, decision
makers, and<br class="">
researchers; I bet I will personally talk to over 20
businesses looking<br class="">
at OSGeo. Those who know me well know that this is why
I make those<br class="">
trips (I don't go for presentations etc.), it is that
face to face<br class="">
representation that is so very important, especially in
the long run.<br class="">
<br class="">
As the leader of the OSGeo foundation, part of my role
is to listen to<br class="">
all of the criticism about me; and I realize that the
negative words<br class="">
you've used about me here for everyone to read, are not
the first<br class="">
negative ones used at me in years past, nor will they be
the last. In<br class="">
the big theater room that is the community, there will
always be those<br class="">
that disagree with me, and I value their opinion as
well.<br class="">
<br class="">
Few in this community see me being so involved behind
the scenes. New<br class="">
committees, new MoUs, FOSS4G local committees, all just
pop up on the<br class="">
scene and grow, but few see me behind the scenes helping
them form<br class="">
initially, and I am ok with that. The core community
members in the<br class="">
OSGeo foundation know that I support them in every way
that I can. I<br class="">
often am actively working 2 or even 3 years in advance
of a FOSS4G for<br class="">
that region, talking with those regions members, getting
them to think<br class="">
of the possibilities, years before the release of the
call for hosting.<br class="">
To you and others it looks like I have no innovation,
no new ideas, I<br class="">
don't work with community leaders, because you don't see
me working<br class="">
behind the scenes for OSGeo. I am ok with that. You
can keep going on<br class="">
in thinking this way of me, but I am very proud of what
I do for OSGeo,<br class="">
what I constantly try to do for OSGeo. Long-time
members of OSGeo know<br class="">
how I have failed in several proposals to past OSGeo
boards, and to this<br class="">
day those so-called "failures" are my most proud
moments. But yes, you<br class="">
can always argue that I am not innovative and do not
help OSGeo.<br class="">
<br class="">
I am also not wired to think of "money" first. I follow
my heart and I<br class="">
try to do the best I can for OSGeo, for the OSGeo
foundation, always,<br class="">
even if it doesn't make sense for me personally or for
my career. I do<br class="">
it, for the love of OSGeo. I also realize that it is
this fact, of how<br class="">
I am wired, that causes conflict with others (another
example is my<br class="">
father, who constantly says I should go get a real job
and earn the<br class="">
money I deserve, he sees me struggle financially and it
drives him<br class="">
crazy). Instead of money, my goal in life is to be
happy and do well<br class="">
for society. I feel OSGeo and its local chapters fits
in perfectly with<br class="">
my own personal goals, and I give to OSGeo everything I
can, every ounce<br class="">
of my being. It is, what I do and what I enjoy.<br
class="">
<br class="">
Ok back on track again:<br class="">
<br class="">
I truly feel that Andrea is doing a great job for
LocationTech, always<br class="">
has. We have known each other for a long time, since
back when I was<br class="">
the MapServer users group chair in Ottawa and she first
attended. I<br class="">
have always treated Andrea and LocationTech with
respect.<br class="">
<br class="">
(before you say how false that is, I will now go into my
vision for OSGeo)<br class="">
<br class="">
Vision For OSGeo<br class="">
================<br class="">
<br class="">
(I should first state that I have called a face to face
meeting with the<br class="">
OSGeo Board members to work together on topics such as
vision and the<br class="">
goals of OSGeo, and how to achieve those goals, and that
meeting will be<br class="">
in January, attended by all members of this new OSGeo
board)<br class="">
<br class="">
"My vision is for OSGeo to be the Open Source geospatial
community all<br class="">
across the globe, everywhere and anywhere, and have fun
doing it. The<br class="">
OSGeo community is special, we are unique, we do great
things for the<br class="">
world, we are open, and we have fun. We accept anyone
into our<br class="">
community and will give them the spotlight, to help
their local<br class="">
community and the world share its spatial information.
We are OSGeo."<br class="">
<br class="">
Many have seen me speak about "community" all around the
world since<br class="">
about 2008, and it is OSGeo's community that is so
valued. This vision<br class="">
puts our community in that spotlight, and is something
that I already<br class="">
know that we all follow in our hearts. It is the OSGeo
spirit that<br class="">
drives us all, that some may not understand, but we can
teach them and<br class="">
help them share their geospatial information openly,
and, show them how<br class="">
fun it is.<br class="">
<br class="">
How to get there<br class="">
================<br class="">
<br class="">
Focus on Developing Regions<br class="">
---------------------------<br class="">
<br class="">
Over the next 5 or 10 years, various developing regions
("developing" in<br class="">
the sense of in-progress of becoming world leaders in
open) across the<br class="">
globe, not known globally for their OSGeo chapters yet,
will be given<br class="">
the OSGeo spotlight. These are important regions of the
world,<br class="">
extremely active locally but not as well known globally
for their<br class="">
efforts in Open Source geospatial. Some possible
examples are South<br class="">
America, South Asia, Russia, China, Middle East, North
Africa, and<br class="">
India. OSGeo will help give them the world stage for
Open Source<br class="">
geospatial.<br class="">
<br class="">
Local Chapters<br class="">
--------------<br class="">
<br class="">
All of the fun happens locally, it is through local
chapters that OSGeo<br class="">
can grow Open Source geospatial software, learn, share,
and have fun. We<br class="">
currently have about 30 official chapters, and about 30
in formation,<br class="">
but we have so much more work to do to help chapters
grow in other<br class="">
communities. Let's help them! :)<br class="">
<br class="">
Projects<br class="">
--------<br class="">
<br class="">
OSGeo projects and those in incubation are very stable
and have vibrant<br class="">
communities. OSGeo must help these projects grow, and
also help<br class="">
incoming projects find a home in our community. We must
be accepting to<br class="">
changing trends and styles in the global industry.<br
class="">
<br class="">
Charter Members<br class="">
---------------<br class="">
<br class="">
OSGeo charter members will drive the formation of the
Open Source<br class="">
geospatial community.<br class="">
<br class="">
Diversity<br class="">
---------<br class="">
<br class="">
OSGeo must from now on have 50% women on its Board of
Directors. This<br class="">
year's board has the first women ever on its board, but
for 2016/2017<br class="">
and beyond, women will again be strongly represented at
the board level<br class="">
of the OSGeo foundation. This will help provide strong
leadership from<br class="">
OSGeo throughout the world.<br class="">
<br class="">
Education and Training<br class="">
----------------------<br class="">
<br class="">
OSGeo will continue to spread Open Source geospatial to
students and<br class="">
educators around the world, through the GeoForAll
initiative. Focus<br class="">
will also change from post-secondary institutions to<br
class="">
secondary/high-school, getting the young minds excited
and interested in<br class="">
sharing and being open.<br class="">
<br class="">
Professional Service Providers<br class="">
------------------------------<br class="">
<br class="">
OSGeo will begin to focus on its service providers, and
give them the<br class="">
spotlight they deserve, for choosing to operate their
business around<br class="">
OSGeo projects. Focus will not only be placed on the
larger businesses,<br class="">
but for the first time ever, small businesses will be
given the<br class="">
spotlight from OSGeo.<br class="">
<br class="">
(in my travels, I estimate that 90% of OSGeo's service
providers have<br class="">
<10 employees, yet we are not giving these businesses
any spotlight)<br class="">
<br class="">
FOSS4G<br class="">
------<br class="">
<br class="">
OSGeo's hugely successful yearly event, the global
FOSS4G, will continue<br class="">
to travel around the world each year. The goal of
OSGeo's global FOSS4G<br class="">
event over the next 5 to 10 years will be to expand to
new areas, plant<br class="">
the OSGeo seed locally, learn, share, and have fun. The
goal will be to<br class="">
share this passion as much as possible, by having
low-cost FOSS4G<br class="">
events. Regional FOSS4G events will satisfy local
needs, in however the<br class="">
local chapters desire.<br class="">
<br class="">
Code Sprints<br class="">
------------<br class="">
<br class="">
OSGeo will actively promote its ability to support all
code sprints of<br class="">
any size, no matter if there is only one project being
enhanced.<br class="">
<br class="">
Working with other organizations<br class="">
--------------------------------<br class="">
<br class="">
Working closely with other organizations will continue
to be important<br class="">
for OSGeo. MoUs with organizations encourage
communication, and usually<br class="">
have the 2 leaders of the parties sit down face to face
once a year and<br class="">
talk (which is really priceless in the long-term for the
commmunity) and<br class="">
review the agreement. Admittedly these agreements are
not liked by the<br class="">
business-types, for not offering any firm details up
front (like<br class="">
financial benefits), but in the long term these
agreements help change<br class="">
opinions, give momentum to both parties, and end up
creating jobs in the<br class="">
industry.<br class="">
<br class="">
Standards<br class="">
---------<br class="">
<br class="">
Standards in geospatial software and data will continue
to be one of the<br class="">
core parts of every OSGeo project.<br class="">
<br class="">
Financial Focus<br class="">
---------------<br class="">
<br class="">
OSGeo has never been about generating revenue. OSGeo is
and will be<br class="">
about being the Open Source geospatial community,
sharing, learning, and<br class="">
having fun. OSGeo will continue to be lean, earning
enough funding to<br class="">
help its annual FOSS4G and other events, maintain
OSGeo's<br class="">
infrastructure, and other critical needs. The OSGeo
foundation will<br class="">
continue to be volunteer driven.<br class="">
<br class="">
Discussion<br class="">
==========<br class="">
<br class="">
In terms of what I would do to foster working with
LocationTech, I would<br class="">
work with Andrea directly to develop an MoU agreement
draft, and then<br class="">
take that draft to each of our Boards. To formalize
this agreement, I<br class="">
would call for a "Summit" to be held around March of
this year between<br class="">
the LocationTech Steering Committee members, and the
OSGeo Board of<br class="">
Directors. This would be a one day meeting, in person,
and not related<br class="">
to any other existing event (not added to an existing
program/event).<br class="">
This would allow the OSGeo Board to meet in January,
establish their<br class="">
goals, and then to sit down prepared with LocationTech
Steering<br class="">
Committee in March.<br class="">
<br class="">
I do feel that the LocationTech/OSGeo relationship needs
to be examined<br class="">
slowly, and this is why I made a stand here this/last
week. I apologize<br class="">
to Andrea if I have offended her, or disrespected her in
any way.<br class="">
<br class="">
About the above vision, I am aware that this was likely
asked of me now,<br class="">
so that some can point out faults in my thinking, how I
am wrong etc.<br class="">
That is ok, I accept that, and I also accept that I most
likely made<br class="">
mistakes in writing this vision today, and I am sure the
other OSGeo<br class="">
board members will help clarify this in January. I feel
the process of<br class="">
creating a vision, and following through with that,
should involve each<br class="">
and every OSGeo member, so I feel that I have nothing to
hide and<br class="">
everything to gain.<br class="">
<br class="">
I would like to thank everyone, for again, being you,
sharing the OSGeo<br class="">
passion, doing what you can, whether it is by teaching,
writing,<br class="">
developing code, managing a business, learning something
new, or just<br class="">
following along, your help and smile is what gets me
through these<br class="">
challenging times.<br class="">
<br class="">
I would also like to deeply thank those who reached out
to me this week,<br class="">
during this hard time on me, I will tell you that twice
I was brought to<br class="">
tears sitting at my computer here reading the small
thanks for<br class="">
representing them, sent from some far away country by a
local leader. I<br class="">
do this for you all.<br class="">
<br class="">
Yours,<br class="">
<br class="">
-jeff<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">From: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">Jeff McKenna
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com" class="">jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com</a>><br
class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">Date: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">15 November
2015 at 19:13:19 GMT<br class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">To: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class=""><a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:discuss@lists.osgeo.org" class="">discuss@lists.osgeo.org</a><br
class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">Subject: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class=""><b class="">Re:
[OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship</b><br
class="">
</span></div>
<br class="">
<br class="">
Hi Cameron,<br class="">
<br class="">
Thank you for your message. It is very refreshing to
speak on this topic openly here, as others would rather
send me strong private messages questioning my sanity, and
making threats. I realize that many cannot be open on
this topic for various reasons.<br class="">
<br class="">
Let me assure everyone here that I only have one agenda,
which is very rare these days, and that is to help the
OSGeo foundation. I am not muzzled by fear or threats,
and I will stand up for the OSGeo foundation whenever that
is required. If by standing up for OSGeo's only event all
year, FOSS4G, means that I am called "confrontational" and
"obstructive", then yes you are fully right.<br class="">
<br class="">
Some may not know this by reading this thread, but I have
always been a big supporter of LocationTech. I was
involved in the beginning of LocationTech, involved in the
sense of being one of the first subscribers to their
mailing list, and I even have had many chats inside their
#locationtech IRC channel, even answering questions from
new LocationTech community members (technical readers will
find it interesting to join their IRC channel now on
freenode and see the first message that is displayed when
entering their channel "LocationTech: location aware open
source software friendly to commercialization."). I have
followed the development of that organization right from
the beginning, where they smartly filled a void by aiming
at the business/commercial side of Open Source geospatial
(of course, recently they publicly pointed out to me, even
questioned my sanity, that this was false, I am dreaming,
that they have always focused instead on the same goals as
OSGeo, but readers, do a google search for LT and press
release, and you will see their early visions). Which is
why I asked now to hear the vision of LocationTech (I was
not answered, but someone else pointed to an FAQ just
made). In any case, no I am not insane, I have always
followed LocationTech closely.<br class="">
<br class="">
I do travel to many OSGeo local chapters around the world,
constantly, and especially to developing areas that are
just becoming interested in Open Source. In a few days I
will again take 3 more planes and represent OSGeo at a
growing community, again putting life on hold, including
my health, my money, and my life in general, to go help
grow the OSGeo community. In this event I can bet that I
will speak personally to over 100 developers, students,
decision makers, and researchers; I bet I will personally
talk to over 20 businesses looking at OSGeo. Those who
know me well know that this is why I make those trips (I
don't go for presentations etc.), it is that face to face
representation that is so very important, especially in
the long run.<br class="">
<br class="">
As the leader of the OSGeo foundation, part of my role is
to listen to all of the criticism about me; and I realize
that the negative words you've used about me here for
everyone to read, are not the first negative ones used at
me in years past, nor will they be the last. In the big
theater room that is the community, there will always be
those that disagree with me, and I value their opinion as
well.<br class="">
<br class="">
Few in this community see me being so involved behind the
scenes. New committees, new MoUs, FOSS4G local
committees, all just pop up on the scene and grow, but few
see me behind the scenes helping them form initially, and
I am ok with that. The core community members in the
OSGeo foundation know that I support them in every way
that I can. I often am actively working 2 or even 3 years
in advance of a FOSS4G for that region, talking with those
regions members, getting them to think of the
possibilities, years before the release of the call for
hosting. To you and others it looks like I have no
innovation, no new ideas, I don't work with community
leaders, because you don't see me working behind the
scenes for OSGeo. I am ok with that. You can keep going
on in thinking this way of me, but I am very proud of what
I do for OSGeo, what I constantly try to do for OSGeo.
Long-time members of OSGeo know how I have failed in
several proposals to past OSGeo boards, and to this day
those so-called "failures" are my most proud moments. But
yes, you can always argue that I am not innovative and do
not help OSGeo.<br class="">
<br class="">
I am also not wired to think of "money" first. I follow
my heart and I try to do the best I can for OSGeo, for the
OSGeo foundation, always, even if it doesn't make sense
for me personally or for my career. I do it, for the love
of OSGeo. I also realize that it is this fact, of how I
am wired, that causes conflict with others (another
example is my father, who constantly says I should go get
a real job and earn the money I deserve, he sees me
struggle financially and it drives him crazy). Instead of
money, my goal in life is to be happy and do well for
society. I feel OSGeo and its local chapters fits in
perfectly with my own personal goals, and I give to OSGeo
everything I can, every ounce of my being. It is, what I
do and what I enjoy.<br class="">
<br class="">
Ok back on track again:<br class="">
<br class="">
I truly feel that Andrea is doing a great job for
LocationTech, always has. We have known each other for a
long time, since back when I was the MapServer users group
chair in Ottawa and she first attended. I have always
treated Andrea and LocationTech with respect.<br class="">
<br class="">
(before you say how false that is, I will now go into my
vision for OSGeo)<br class="">
<br class="">
Vision For OSGeo<br class="">
================<br class="">
<br class="">
(I should first state that I have called a face to face
meeting with the OSGeo Board members to work together on
topics such as vision and the goals of OSGeo, and how to
achieve those goals, and that meeting will be in January,
attended by all members of this new OSGeo board)<br
class="">
<br class="">
"My vision is for OSGeo to be the Open Source geospatial
community all across the globe, everywhere and anywhere,
and have fun doing it. The OSGeo community is special, we
are unique, we do great things for the world, we are open,
and we have fun. We accept anyone into our community and
will give them the spotlight, to help their local
community and the world share its spatial information. We
are OSGeo."<br class="">
<br class="">
Many have seen me speak about "community" all around the
world since about 2008, and it is OSGeo's community that
is so valued. This vision puts our community in that
spotlight, and is something that I already know that we
all follow in our hearts. It is the OSGeo spirit that
drives us all, that some may not understand, but we can
teach them and help them share their geospatial
information openly, and, show them how fun it is.<br
class="">
<br class="">
How to get there<br class="">
================<br class="">
<br class="">
Focus on Developing Regions<br class="">
---------------------------<br class="">
<br class="">
Over the next 5 or 10 years, various developing regions
("developing" in the sense of in-progress of becoming
world leaders in open) across the globe, not known
globally for their OSGeo chapters yet, will be given the
OSGeo spotlight. These are important regions of the
world, extremely active locally but not as well known
globally for their efforts in Open Source geospatial.
Some possible examples are South America, South Asia,
Russia, China, Middle East, North Africa, and India.
OSGeo will help give them the world stage for Open Source
geospatial.<br class="">
<br class="">
Local Chapters<br class="">
--------------<br class="">
<br class="">
All of the fun happens locally, it is through local
chapters that OSGeo can grow Open Source geospatial
software, learn, share, and have fun. We currently have
about 30 official chapters, and about 30 in formation, but
we have so much more work to do to help chapters grow in
other communities. Let's help them! :)<br class="">
<br class="">
Projects<br class="">
--------<br class="">
<br class="">
OSGeo projects and those in incubation are very stable and
have vibrant communities. OSGeo must help these projects
grow, and also help incoming projects find a home in our
community. We must be accepting to changing trends and
styles in the global industry.<br class="">
<br class="">
Charter Members<br class="">
---------------<br class="">
<br class="">
OSGeo charter members will drive the formation of the Open
Source geospatial community.<br class="">
<br class="">
Diversity<br class="">
---------<br class="">
<br class="">
OSGeo must from now on have 50% women on its Board of
Directors. This year's board has the first women ever on
its board, but for 2016/2017 and beyond, women will again
be strongly represented at the board level of the OSGeo
foundation. This will help provide strong leadership from
OSGeo throughout the world.<br class="">
<br class="">
Education and Training<br class="">
----------------------<br class="">
<br class="">
OSGeo will continue to spread Open Source geospatial to
students and educators around the world, through the
GeoForAll initiative. Focus will also change from
post-secondary institutions to secondary/high-school,
getting the young minds excited and interested in sharing
and being open.<br class="">
<br class="">
Professional Service Providers<br class="">
------------------------------<br class="">
<br class="">
OSGeo will begin to focus on its service providers, and
give them the spotlight they deserve, for choosing to
operate their business around OSGeo projects. Focus will
not only be placed on the larger businesses, but for the
first time ever, small businesses will be given the
spotlight from OSGeo.<br class="">
<br class="">
(in my travels, I estimate that 90% of OSGeo's service
providers have <10 employees, yet we are not giving
these businesses any spotlight)<br class="">
<br class="">
FOSS4G<br class="">
------<br class="">
<br class="">
OSGeo's hugely successful yearly event, the global FOSS4G,
will continue to travel around the world each year. The
goal of OSGeo's global FOSS4G event over the next 5 to 10
years will be to expand to new areas, plant the OSGeo seed
locally, learn, share, and have fun. The goal will be to
share this passion as much as possible, by having low-cost
FOSS4G events. Regional FOSS4G events will satisfy local
needs, in however the local chapters desire.<br class="">
<br class="">
Code Sprints<br class="">
------------<br class="">
<br class="">
OSGeo will actively promote its ability to support all
code sprints of any size, no matter if there is only one
project being enhanced.<br class="">
<br class="">
Working with other organizations<br class="">
--------------------------------<br class="">
<br class="">
Working closely with other organizations will continue to
be important for OSGeo. MoUs with organizations encourage
communication, and usually have the 2 leaders of the
parties sit down face to face once a year and talk (which
is really priceless in the long-term for the commmunity)
and review the agreement. Admittedly these agreements are
not liked by the business-types, for not offering any firm
details up front (like financial benefits), but in the
long term these agreements help change opinions, give
momentum to both parties, and end up creating jobs in the
industry.<br class="">
<br class="">
Standards<br class="">
---------<br class="">
<br class="">
Standards in geospatial software and data will continue to
be one of the core parts of every OSGeo project.<br
class="">
<br class="">
Financial Focus<br class="">
---------------<br class="">
<br class="">
OSGeo has never been about generating revenue. OSGeo is
and will be about being the Open Source geospatial
community, sharing, learning, and having fun. OSGeo will
continue to be lean, earning enough funding to help its
annual FOSS4G and other events, maintain OSGeo's
infrastructure, and other critical needs. The OSGeo
foundation will continue to be volunteer driven.<br
class="">
<br class="">
Discussion<br class="">
==========<br class="">
<br class="">
In terms of what I would do to foster working with
LocationTech, I would work with Andrea directly to develop
an MoU agreement draft, and then take that draft to each
of our Boards. To formalize this agreement, I would call
for a "Summit" to be held around March of this year
between the LocationTech Steering Committee members, and
the OSGeo Board of Directors. This would be a one day
meeting, in person, and not related to any other existing
event (not added to an existing program/event). This would
allow the OSGeo Board to meet in January, establish their
goals, and then to sit down prepared with LocationTech
Steering Committee in March.<br class="">
<br class="">
I do feel that the LocationTech/OSGeo relationship needs
to be examined slowly, and this is why I made a stand here
this/last week. I apologize to Andrea if I have offended
her, or disrespected her in any way.<br class="">
<br class="">
About the above vision, I am aware that this was likely
asked of me now, so that some can point out faults in my
thinking, how I am wrong etc. That is ok, I accept that,
and I also accept that I most likely made mistakes in
writing this vision today, and I am sure the other OSGeo
board members will help clarify this in January. I feel
the process of creating a vision, and following through
with that, should involve each and every OSGeo member, so
I feel that I have nothing to hide and everything to gain.<br
class="">
<br class="">
I would like to thank everyone, for again, being you,
sharing the OSGeo passion, doing what you can, whether it
is by teaching, writing, developing code, managing a
business, learning something new, or just following along,
your help and smile is what gets me through these
challenging times.<br class="">
<br class="">
I would also like to deeply thank those who reached out to
me this week, during this hard time on me, I will tell you
that twice I was brought to tears sitting at my computer
here reading the small thanks for representing them, sent
from some far away country by a local leader. I do this
for you all.<br class="">
<br class="">
Yours,<br class="">
<br class="">
-jeff<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
-- <br class="">
Jeff McKenna<br class="">
President, OSGeo<br class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna" class="">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna</a><br
class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
On 2015-11-13 4:27 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Hi Jeff,<br class="">
As president of OSGeo I've seen in you some admirable
qualities. You<br class="">
regularly travel around the world, talking passionately
and eloquently<br class="">
about OSGeo and Open Source. You monitor and contribute
to many email<br class="">
lists. For people "in the back row of OSGeo" you do a
great job of<br class="">
encouraging people to step forward and get involved.<br
class="">
<br class="">
But, in supporting other OSGeo leaders, who might have a
vision that was<br class="">
not directly derived or aligned with your own, I've
found your opinions<br class="">
to often be very obstructive, confrontational, and
lacking of any<br class="">
innovative vision to resolve differences. This is
inappropriate from a<br class="">
community leader. It is the sort of behaviour likely to
turn people away<br class="">
from a community, and have them look for another
community to work with.<br class="">
<br class="">
With regards to the relationship between OSGeo and
LocationTech:<br class="">
<br class="">
* Could you please acknowledge that Andrea is also
working toward the<br class="">
best interests of the Open Source Geospatial community,
even if she is<br class="">
using a different path and vehicle to achieve this.<br
class="">
<br class="">
* Could you please treat those who have a different
opinion to you,<br class="">
Andrea in this case, with respect and dignity, even if
in your eyes they<br class="">
are wronging you or what you believe in.<br class="">
<br class="">
* Rather than just tell LocationTech what they shouldn't
do, provide<br class="">
some vision and leadership and suggest what should be
done instead.<br class="">
(This is much harder). You may note that Andrea has
answered your<br class="">
questions as best she could in her FAQ.<br class="">
<br class="">
---<br class="">
<br class="">
A bit of background and reality check: From memory, the
FOSS4G 2009 PCO<br class="">
was paid ~ $70,000 for managing the FOSS4G conference,
and OSGeo<br class="">
guaranteed the conference, not the PCO. OSGeo was lucky
in 2012, when<br class="">
FOSS4G was cancelled [1] and OSGeo didn't have to pay
cancellation<br class="">
expenses. Based on estimates of exposure for recent
conferences, this<br class="">
would likely have been a lot over $100,000. So being
paid $90,000 to run<br class="">
and guarantee a conference is in the right ball park.<br
class="">
<br class="">
Year after year, after FOSS4G, there is discussion about
the loss of<br class="">
knowledge between conference organising teams. There is
a clear<br class="">
opportunity to have a PCO, or person take on a perpetual
role supporting<br class="">
FOSS4G events. For the first time, LocationTech has put
a practical<br class="">
proposal forward to fill this role, and help make FOSS4G
better. This is<br class="">
great, it would be solving a real problem. We might not
accept the<br class="">
proposal, but we certainly should not accuse
LocationTech of foul play.<br class="">
<br class="">
Jeff, you've dismissed my request for a vision. (I
acknowledge that<br class="">
compiling a vision is difficult, and typically involves
a collation of<br class="">
lots of ideas from within the community). Here are some
questions which<br class="">
might help:<br class="">
<br class="">
* Should FOSS4G be run at minimum cost to delegates, or
should it aim to<br class="">
make money to fund OSGeo?<br class="">
<br class="">
* There are many valuable activities which OSGeo doesn't
implement due<br class="">
to not having volunteers step up, or having people step
for a limited<br class="">
period. Should OSGeo hire someone to implement such
activities? Eg: Hire<br class="">
someone or some organisation to support knowledge
sharing between foss4g<br class="">
conferences, have someone manage marketing, have someone
chase sponsors,<br class="">
... Ie. Should OSGeo act as a low capital or high
capital organisation?<br class="">
<br class="">
* Is there anything wrong with there being both low
capital (OSGeo) and<br class="">
high capital (LocationTech) organisations, both of which
address<br class="">
different users and capture difference communities? Both
organisations<br class="">
are running effectively now. Should they be
restructured? If so how?<br class="">
<br class="">
* There has been mention of a MOU between LocationTech
and OSGeo. Fine.<br class="">
But what next? A MOU is just a first step, a means to an
end, and by<br class="">
itself is of little practical value.<br class="">
<br class="">
* A lot of thought was put into these questions and
captured into the<br class="">
OSGeo Board Priorities [2] a few years back. Do these
priorities still<br class="">
capture OSGeo goals? Please don't say what you don't
want without<br class="">
encouraging and ideally contributing to what you want
instead.<br class="">
<br class="">
* Note, if you don't articulate a practical vision to
follow, it will by<br class="">
default be determined by someone else.<br class="">
<br class="">
[1]
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_2012_Lessons_Learned">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_2012_Lessons_Learned</a><br
class="">
[2]
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_of_Directors#Board_Priorities">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_of_Directors#Board_Priorities</a><br
class="">
<br class="">
On 14/11/2015 12:24 am, Jeff McKenna wrote:<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Hi Andrea,<br class="">
<br class="">
You seem to value the OSGeo community so much, so much
in fact that<br class="">
you would smoothly court all 3 of our bidders for
OSGeo's only source<br class="">
of revenue and publicity all year, our beloved global
FOSS4G event. It<br class="">
is true that it is "ridiculous", from an organization
that (apparently<br class="">
formerly) focused on commerce, to ask OSGeo to pay you
(90,000 USD),<br class="">
to take control of OSGeo's only event (worth 1,000,000
USD), and then<br class="">
think that this is a fine since you offer (my answer:
a polite no<br class="">
thank you) of handling losses for OSGeo's FOSS4G
event, in maybe one<br class="">
of the strongest regions for attendees in the world?
If we are<br class="">
speaking of commerce, this doesn't make sense.<br
class="">
<br class="">
I think Maxi said it well, that we all are trying to
understand your<br class="">
motives here. How about an MoU together, exchange of
official<br class="">
letters, big press release, creating a working group
of half<br class="">
LocationTech and half OSGeo board members, an exchange
of talks at<br class="">
each others events, become the sustaining sponsor of
OSGeo; instead,<br class="">
here we are.<br class="">
<br class="">
If you value the OSGeo community so much, why would
you create a<br class="">
separate foundation with the exact same goals, and
then later come<br class="">
back to the other foundation saying "no, we love you.
Give us the<br class="">
right to run your event". Ha, pardon?<br class="">
<br class="">
-jeff<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
On 2015-11-12 7:35 PM, Andrea Ross wrote:<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Jeff,<br class="">
<br class="">
It is really hard to discuss this topic because you
make stuff up. The<br class="">
concerns stem from the fantasy rather than reality.<br
class="">
<br class="">
The FAQ produced recently<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/15x1Q3J9OPM95jEkeZhYlU0xB5uO9V9NCOI28g5B_Yqc/edit?usp=drive_web"><https://docs.google.com/document/d/15x1Q3J9OPM95jEkeZhYlU0xB5uO9V9NCOI28g5B_Yqc/edit?usp=drive_web></a><br
class="">
<br class="">
does a pretty good job covering the situation.<br
class="">
<br class="">
In 3 years, so far as I know, absolutely no harm has
come to OSGeo as a<br class="">
result of LocationTech, and certainly not from any
official/intentional<br class="">
actions. On the contrary, there's a nice body of
ever growing benefits.<br class="">
<br class="">
Regarding your new claims:<br class="">
<br class="">
* The press releases & charter for LocationTech
have not changed.<br class="">
They're all still up where they always were and
haven't been<br class="">
modified. (seriously?!)<br class="">
* LocationTech & OSGeo have had formal
relations for some time as Jody<br class="">
notes. There is all kinds of collaboration
happening frequently and<br class="">
people are fine with it.<br class="">
* We gave many examples in the FAQ about
LocationTech helping OSGeo.<br class="">
I'm not even sure that (positive list) was
calculated necessarily as<br class="">
much as things that arise matter of course from
the things the group<br class="">
does.<br class="">
* The evidence is for all to see in the bid
proposals, LocationTech<br class="">
has offered to cover losses and promising
payments on par with the<br class="">
best payments from past FOSS4G's. The numbers are
based on a<br class="">
conservative budget. When you also factor that
LocationTech has<br class="">
sponsored in which money has flowed to OSGeo,
your claims<br class="">
LocationTech is setting sights on OSGeo income
are even more<br class="">
ridiculous.<br class="">
* As Jody & others have noted, the Tour is
something that was born out<br class="">
of LocationTech. It is inclusive to any who want
to participate. The<br class="">
FAQ covers why LocationTech members &
projects care about FOSS4G,<br class="">
and it's very reasonable.<br class="">
<br class="">
It's worth saying that people involved with
LocationTech have also been<br class="">
involved with OSGeo for some time. Your efforts to
portray them as<br class="">
outsiders is bogus. They are as welcome as anyone
else to participate.<br class="">
<br class="">
I'm not sure what else to say. It's such shame to
have this be<br class="">
needlessly misrepresented.<br class="">
<br class="">
Andrea<br class="">
<br class="">
On 12/11/15 21:58, Jeff McKenna wrote:<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Hi Cameron,<br
class="">
<br class="">
I am also glad to speak of this publicly, this is
a very important<br class="">
topic.<br class="">
<br class="">
I have been thinking more and more about Rob's
response (thank you so<br class="">
much Rob for taking the time to speak with me on
that). I will speak<br class="">
honestly here again, and I don't mean to offend:<br
class="">
<br class="">
I am now left with a realization that, what I
always thought of<br class="">
LocationTech as created to help
commercially-friendly geospatial<br class="">
software, is wrong. I always just assumed that
they filled a nice<br class="">
hole in the equation, by focusing on business
needs. As was pointed<br class="">
out to me today, their goals now are in fact the
exact same as<br class="">
OSGeo's. In fact, I have to really dig now for
the LocationTech's<br class="">
former tagline of "commercially-friendly.." on
their website, but I<br class="">
found the initial press releases for LocationTech
and there it is in<br class="">
the second sentence, and then entire paragraphs on
that goal. Did<br class="">
something change there that I missed?<br class="">
<br class="">
So now, yes, I am confused.<br class="">
<br class="">
And no wonder that, from those initial 2012/2013
press releases from<br class="">
LocationTech, fast forward to 2015 and they are
contacting each of our<br class="">
3 bidding teams for FOSS4G 2017, I'm left with a
sense of surprise and<br class="">
shock. The overlap exists, we are the same
foundation, and, to make<br class="">
matters more pressing, LocationTech has politely
declined any interest<br class="">
in creating their own global event for their
community, and set their<br class="">
sights on OSGeo's only real source of revenue and
global publicity,<br class="">
our yearly FOSS4G event. Now the pressure is on,
as this 2017<br class="">
discussion involves huge money, finances, brands,
people's jobs, two<br class="">
communities, and our beloved FOSS4G event that we
have painfully built<br class="">
to be a global brand. And yes passions are
flowing, strong words of<br class="">
"fear", "bullying", "muck" are being dropped, and
I have no doubt<br class="">
someone soon will say "inclusive" or "exclusive",
and then "code of<br class="">
conduct", oh let's not forget "trademark" and even
"lawyer" (to be<br class="">
honest, in the past week I've heard each of these
words about this<br class="">
topic). It's all an absolute mess, if you ask my
opinion.<br class="">
<br class="">
My vision is to work with foundations and
organizations all around the<br class="">
world, locally or globally. OSGeo has done a
great job on this,<br class="">
through our (admittedly slow process for some
people) of MoUs, and<br class="">
building those relationships through designated
committees or special<br class="">
sessions at FOSS4G events.<br class="">
<br class="">
This sudden thrust of LocationTech, by contacting
each of our 3<br class="">
bidders for 2017, is very calculated on their
side, but on OSGeo's<br class="">
side, this is a hard pill to swallow so fast.<br
class="">
<br class="">
I actually don't think it is OSGeo that should be
the ones talking<br class="">
now. We haven't changed, we have always put on
FOSS4G each year,<br class="">
moving around the globe. We put community first
and foremost, our<br class="">
community is very strong. I think our community
is what attracts<br class="">
LocationTech to OSGeo, why they strategically
contacted each 2017<br class="">
bidders, but I'd love to hear it from their
mouths.<br class="">
<br class="">
So I don't believe it is OSGeo that should be the
ones explaining<br class="">
ourselves now. I think this is the time for
LocationTech to explain<br class="">
their vision, how it has changed over the years,
and how it sees<br class="">
itself in the ecosystem, because OSGeo has been
around now a long time<br class="">
and their is no confusion about OSGeo.<br class="">
<br class="">
In regards to the current situation, I wish we
could start with an<br class="">
MoU, work slowly on building a relationship, do
not strategically<br class="">
contact bidders or groups on either side, but work
together on<br class="">
building this ecosystem - maybe offering each
other a "topic talk"<br class="">
extended session at each of our events, maybe
discussing becoming a<br class="">
sustaining sponsor of each other's foundation,
maybe having a shared<br class="">
"working group" on this involving both
LocationTech and OSGeo board<br class="">
members.<br class="">
<br class="">
I've done a lot of writing the last couple of
days. I hope this at<br class="">
least helps explain what is on my mind.<br
class="">
<br class="">
Oh, as some privately enjoy writing to me and
saying I am wrong, well<br class="">
yes, I am often wrong, but at least I am speaking
publicly, and trying<br class="">
so hard always to make sure that OSGeo and FOSS4G
are properly<br class="">
represented.<br class="">
<br class="">
-jeff<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
On 2015-11-12 4:04 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:<br
class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Hi Jeff, Venka,
Jody, Rob,<br class="">
<br class="">
Thanks for initiating this discussion and
starting to put ideas out<br class="">
for<br class="">
public discussion.<br class="">
<br class="">
Jeff, Venka, I get the impression from your
emails that you are<br class="">
concerned that LocationTech might "steal"
community mind-share, and in<br class="">
particular take control of key OSGeo tasks such
as FOSS4G and in the<br class="">
process change focus of FOSS4G into a more
commercial event, which<br class="">
increases prices, and looses core community
driven focus. Am I<br class="">
right? Or<br class="">
could you please clarify.<br class="">
<br class="">
For the record, at the time I was disappointed
at the time that<br class="">
Location<br class="">
Tech was created, and the functionality of
Location Tech didn't get<br class="">
created under the umbrella of OSGeo. However
both organisations exist<br class="">
now, and I can see that in moving forward that
both organisations can<br class="">
exist successfully together and complement each
other. (+1 to Rob's<br class="">
comments).<br class="">
<br class="">
A few years back, when both Jeff and I were on
the board, we<br class="">
co-authored<br class="">
"Board Priorities" [1]. (Ok, I did a lot of
writing, but the board did<br class="">
contribute and sign off on it). Prior boards
have similarly outlined<br class="">
OSGeo's priorities which have been embedded in
our official documents.<br class="">
The "Board Priorities" include focus on OSGeo
acting as a "low<br class="">
capital,<br class="">
volunteer focused organisation", and acknowledge
that a the role of<br class="">
the<br class="">
"high capital" business model is better
accomplished by LocationTech.<br class="">
<br class="">
Jeff, Venka, Jody and others on the board, what
is your vision for<br class="">
OSGeo's future direction, and in particular,
what is your vision for a<br class="">
future relationship with Location Tech? Should
OSGeo revise our focus<br class="">
and goals? It might help to start by being
specific. What should OSGeo<br class="">
take responsibility for? What should Location
Tech take responsibility<br class="">
for? Are the organisations appropriately
structured and resourced to<br class="">
take on that responsibility? If not, what should
change to make that<br class="">
happen?<br class="">
<br class="">
With regards to private (and threatening
emails), I suggest replying<br class="">
with something like:<br class="">
"Thanks for your comments, you have some valid
concerns. I'd like to<br class="">
respond to your suggestions publicly so others
can join in and we can<br class="">
deal with your suggestions appropriately. Is it
ok if I do so?"<br class="">
If you don't get the ok, don't deal with the
suggestion. But I suggest<br class="">
refrain from implication of bullying as it
implies that<br class="">
LocationTech is<br class="">
playing dirty tactics, which reflects badly on
LocationTech and<br class="">
OSGeo as<br class="">
it suggests that the two organisations are
unable to resolve issues<br class="">
professionally. (I'm hoping that mentioned
"bullying" is just a<br class="">
case of<br class="">
some people getting a bit more passionate that
maybe they should).<br class="">
<br class="">
Warm regards, Cameron<br class="">
<br class="">
[1]
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_of_Directors#Board_Priorities">http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_of_Directors#Board_Priorities</a><br
class="">
<br class="">
On 13/11/2015 3:53 am, Rob Emanuele wrote:<br
class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Hi Jeff,<br
class="">
<br class="">
You are right, commercial-friendliness
certainly does play a part in<br class="">
LocationTech. The way I've seen that enacted
is by the use of the<br class="">
Eclipse Foundation's legal department to
ensure that the projects<br class="">
which are supported by LocationTech are
declared by a legal team<br class="">
to be<br class="">
free of proprietary or wrongly-licensed code.
In this way, commercial<br class="">
entities can use the projects with some
assurance that they will not<br class="">
be sued down the line for code that was not
actually open in the way<br class="">
they thought it was.<br class="">
<br class="">
Also, there is a steering committee that makes
decisions about how<br class="">
the<br class="">
budget will be used. The budget mainly
consists of member company's<br class="">
dues. The members of the steering committee
are decided by membership<br class="">
level (large membership gets representation on
the steering<br class="">
committee)<br class="">
as well as a lower-membership level elected
committee. There is also<br class="">
representation by the developers, who vote
independently of any<br class="">
company and are there to represent the
committers on the project. For<br class="">
more information, you can read through some
links here:<br class="">
<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.locationtech.org/charter">https://www.locationtech.org/charter</a><br
class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.locationtech.org/election2015">https://www.locationtech.org/election2015</a><br
class="">
<br class="">
In practice, as a maintainer of an open source
project and developer,<br class="">
what LocationTech has meant to me is support
for my project in ways<br class="">
that are not centered around business. To me
it's been a place where<br class="">
I've gotten to collaborate with similar open
source projects and have<br class="">
my project be promoted through events and
other channels; for<br class="">
instance<br class="">
I participate in Google Summer of Code and
Facebook Open Academy as a<br class="">
mentor through the Eclipse Foundation. Perhaps
these are needs that<br class="">
can also be served by OSGeo, but they have in
practice been met by<br class="">
LocationTech. From my perspective as a project
lead and open source<br class="">
developer, that there are multiple channels
that can potentially<br class="">
support me and my project is a great thing and
signs of a healthy<br class="">
domain.<br class="">
<br class="">
I did not start LocationTech. So for me it's
not a question of, why<br class="">
should LocationTech be created when there is
already OSGeo;<br class="">
LocationTech already exists, and I don't think
it's up to me to<br class="">
question it's existence. Nor do I think it's a
useful exercise to<br class="">
question the existence of something that
clearly has support and is<br class="">
supporting others. I can only decide which
organizations I believe in<br class="">
and support, and what I can get out of those
organizations as far as<br class="">
them supporting me. So on a personal level, my
thoughts are that both<br class="">
OSGeo and LocationTech are good organizations.
I'd like to find ways<br class="">
to support both organizations, and find ways
both organizations can<br class="">
support me and my project.<br class="">
<br class="">
On a more general level, I'm against
centralization. Having diversity<br class="">
in governance structures, funding models and
support channels is a<br class="">
good thing, and I don't want there to be only
one "true" organization<br class="">
that I can look to for support. However, like
I mentioned, the ideal<br class="">
would be that those organizations could figure
out how to use their<br class="">
difference skill sets to work together on
making the community as a<br class="">
whole move forward. And that is what I am
hoping OSGeo and<br class="">
LocationTech can do (as well as any other
related organizations).<br class="">
<br class="">
Jody did a talk at FOSS4G NA 2015 on some of
the differences between<br class="">
LocationTech and OSGeo, I recommend it:<br
class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://youtu.be/sdpEa6XdQEo">https://youtu.be/sdpEa6XdQEo</a><br class="">
<br class="">
Best,<br class="">
Rob<br class="">
<br class="">
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Jeff McKenna<br
class="">
<<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com">jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com"><mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com></a>><br class="">
wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
Hi Rob,<br class="">
<br class="">
Thank you for your very thoughtful
response. You summarize the<br class="">
situation very well. I think talking
openly like this on this<br class="">
topic, is the only way to make this all
work.<br class="">
<br class="">
It sounds like I am wrong about
LocationTech's goals; at the same<br class="">
time then, if that is the case, that
LocationTech is not about<br class="">
commerce (doesn't "commercially friendly"
encourage business<br class="">
interest?), then what was the need to
create a separate new<br class="">
foundation, also focused on growing Open
Source geospatial<br class="">
software?<br class="">
<br class="">
I hope we can speak openly here Rob, I do
not mean any disrespect<br class="">
to you personally or to LocationTech (some
take it personal).<br class="">
Please share here the reasons you see to
have 2 foundations<br class="">
focused on the same goal.<br class="">
<br class="">
Thanks,<br class="">
<br class="">
-jeff<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
On 2015-11-12 11:37 AM, Rob Emanuele wrote:<br
class="">
<br class="">
Hi Jeff,<br class="">
<br class="">
I'm sorry to hear you are being bullied
in private messages.<br class="">
It is<br class="">
perhaps best to bring in the Code of
Conduct committee to<br class="">
help<br class="">
handle<br class="">
this; direct threats and private
bulling tactics seem in<br class="">
violation with<br class="">
the CoC, and there should be steps
taken to ensure that our<br class="">
community<br class="">
doesn't have bulling in our midst that
goes unaddressed.<br class="">
<br class="">
I'm disappointed that you take
LocationTech's core goal as<br class="">
"to<br class="">
promote<br class="">
business and give those businesses a
stage". Your point of<br class="">
view and<br class="">
behavior on the lists makes more sense
knowing that, though;<br class="">
if you<br class="">
believe that LocationTech is really
about promoting the<br class="">
businesses, and<br class="">
not the greater community, then having
LocationTech involved<br class="">
in the<br class="">
FOSS4G conferences would diminish the
non-business community<br class="">
members'<br class="">
role in the conference, which would be
a Bad thing. However,<br class="">
as a member<br class="">
of the LocationTech PMC and someone who
was/is involved in<br class="">
the<br class="">
FOSS4G NA<br class="">
2015 and FOSS4G NA 2016 process, as
well as someone involved<br class="">
in the<br class="">
FOSS4G 2017 Philadelphia bid, I want to
assure you that is<br class="">
not<br class="">
the case.<br class="">
<br class="">
There is real focus and real work being
done at LocationTech<br class="">
to help the<br class="">
community of developers and users of
FOSS4G. In this instance<br class="">
I'm using<br class="">
FOSS4G for what the acronym actually
means, Free and Open<br class="">
Source<br class="">
Software for Geospatial, not referring
to the conference<br class="">
that has<br class="">
captured that name. Both LocationTech
and OSGeo exist to<br class="">
support FOSS4G,<br class="">
and the greater community (greater then
both of those<br class="">
organizations)<br class="">
that use and develop FOSS4G. There are
differences in the<br class="">
organizations<br class="">
for sure, and I think highlighting
those differences and<br class="">
really<br class="">
understanding how they serve the
community in different<br class="">
ways is<br class="">
important. The ideal scenario that I
see is that both<br class="">
organizations<br class="">
would use those differences to
collaborate and have a<br class="">
sum-greater-than-it's-parts type of
support system for<br class="">
FOSS4G.<br class="">
Instead,<br class="">
we have a situation where there's
distrust, finger pointing,<br class="">
and<br class="">
political "power plays" against each
other. We have the<br class="">
president of one<br class="">
of the organizations characterizing the
core goal of the<br class="">
other<br class="">
organization in a dangerously wrong
way. We have decisions<br class="">
and<br class="">
discussions about a million dollar
revenue generating<br class="">
conference focused<br class="">
on that million dollars, rather then
how to ensure that<br class="">
conference does<br class="">
the best job possible at supporting and
pushing forward the<br class="">
community.<br class="">
We have the precious resource that is
the energy of<br class="">
volunteers<br class="">
being<br class="">
spent on political infighting rather
than on collaboration<br class="">
towards<br class="">
serving the community. I'm not sure the
best path forward for<br class="">
this, but<br class="">
I want to declare that the situation as
I see it is bad<br class="">
for the<br class="">
community, collaboration between OSGeo
and LocationTech would<br class="">
be good<br class="">
for the community, and I hope as a
whole we can move towards<br class="">
that better<br class="">
future.<br class="">
<br class="">
I hear your concerns for the price of
the FOSS4G NA tickets,<br class="">
though I'll<br class="">
point out to people who are following
along that it's not as<br class="">
simple as a<br class="">
flat $1000 dollar rate. I encourage you
to look at the<br class="">
registration<br class="">
pricing breakdown when it's published
for FOSS4G NA 2016, be<br class="">
sure to<br class="">
apply for a non-corporate pass if you
will not be reimbursed<br class="">
by a<br class="">
company, and to apply for a scholarship
if the cost is still<br class="">
too high.<br class="">
Also, if you are giving a talk,
registration is free, so<br class="">
please submit!<br class="">
The Call For Proposals is now open<br
class="">
(<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://2016.foss4g-na.org/cfp"><https://2016.foss4g-na.org/cfp></a><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://2016.foss4g-na.org/cfp">https://2016.foss4g-na.org/cfp</a>).<br
class="">
Jeff, your presence was missed at
FOSS4G NA 2015 and I hope<br class="">
that you can<br class="">
come to Raleigh for FOSS4G NA 2016.<br
class="">
<br class="">
Best,<br class="">
Rob<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Jeff
McKenna<br class="">
<<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com">jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com</a><br
class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com"><mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com></a><br
class="">
<<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com">mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com"><mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com></a>>><br class="">
<br class="">
wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
On 2015-11-12 7:01 AM, Jody Garnett
wrote:<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
I have gotten a number of
private emails expressing<br class="">
concerns about<br class="">
LocationTech being involved in
several of the foss4g<br class="">
bids. I<br class="">
guess I had<br class="">
the opposite concern last year
when there was the<br class="">
joint OSGeo /<br class="">
LocationTech foss4gna
conference. I was kind of<br class="">
embarrassed our<br class="">
behavior<br class="">
as a community - would prefer
to see us as welcoming<br class="">
and supportive<br class="">
(especially as we had a first
time organizer that<br class="">
could use our<br class="">
support).<br class="">
<br class="">
Hi Jody,<br class="">
<br class="">
I am very glad that you brought
this up publicly.<br class="">
Lately I<br class="">
too have<br class="">
received very disturbing direct
emails, containing<br class="">
threats<br class="">
of "if<br class="">
this happens you watch" "karma you
watch yourself" "if we<br class="">
lose you<br class="">
watch out" and direct bullying
tactics, for speaking my<br class="">
mind on this<br class="">
issue. The same people sending
these threats will not<br class="">
speak<br class="">
publicly on this, so I have asked
them to stop sending me<br class="">
these<br class="">
messages, but the messages
continue, so I have stopped<br class="">
answering<br class="">
them. These are "power-play"
emails sent directly to me,<br class="">
but I will<br class="">
tell them here publicly, bullying
me will not stop me<br class="">
from<br class="">
speaking<br class="">
openly about OSGeo's one event all
year, the global<br class="">
FOSS4G. (for<br class="">
those not following the 2017
conference discussions, you<br class="">
would have<br class="">
to read a long thread to get caught
up<br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Call-to-discuss-FOSS4G-2017-proposals-prior-to-voting-td5234235.html">http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/Call-to-discuss-FOSS4G-2017-proposals-prior-to-voting-td5234235.html</a>).<br
class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
As someone just wrote last night on
another list, likely<br class="">
there would<br class="">
be no one else that has attended
more FOSS4G events,<br class="">
regional,<br class="">
global, anything, than myself. I
make a point of going to<br class="">
a FOSS4G<br class="">
event, to help grow the local
community, no matter what<br class="">
size of the<br class="">
event or where it is. Lately in my
FOSS4G travels I have<br class="">
noticed a<br class="">
return to our FOSS4G roots, where
the popular events are<br class="">
very low<br class="">
cost, aimed at developers, users,
students, researchers,<br class="">
and the<br class="">
smaller companies trying to make a
living (a great recent<br class="">
example is<br class="">
the FOSS4G-Como event this past
July). Getting back to<br class="">
the topic of<br class="">
your message: I too have been
embarrassed by recent<br class="">
FOSS4G-NorthAmerica events; I was
shocked to see the<br class="">
1,000 USD<br class="">
registration fee there.<br class="">
<br class="">
But I was not too upset, because no
one is traveling the<br class="">
small<br class="">
FOSS4Gs like me to see the
difference, and I didn't see<br class="">
complaints<br class="">
voiced from the local NorthAmerican
community.<br class="">
LocationTech<br class="">
involved in FOSS4G-NA is a good
thing, to promote<br class="">
business<br class="">
and give<br class="">
those businesses a stage; the core
goal of LocationTech.<br class="">
<br class="">
However now we are in the process
for deciding the global<br class="">
FOSS4G<br class="">
event for 2017, OSGeo's flagship
event, attended by the<br class="">
international community, and we
must be very careful.<br class="">
Working with<br class="">
foundations is good (hence all of
OSGeo's great MoUs),<br class="">
and<br class="">
I'll use<br class="">
the upcoming example that the 2016
team is considering,<br class="">
giving<br class="">
LocationTech a 90 minute slot in
the program for their<br class="">
projects (and<br class="">
the same for OSGeo, UN, likely OGC,
and other<br class="">
organizations). This<br class="">
is a wonderful way for OSGeo's
FOSS4G event to involve<br class="">
other<br class="">
organizations. I hope that
LocationTech will also give<br class="">
OSGeo a 90<br class="">
minute slot in their big conference
someday as well; this<br class="">
would be<br class="">
exactly what I see as best-case
scenario.<br class="">
<br class="">
On the other hand, not signing an
MoU, and then just<br class="">
contacting all<br class="">
of our 2017 bidders, is quite a
different method to get<br class="">
to the<br class="">
table. Instead of a long-standing
MoU agreement that<br class="">
would<br class="">
foster<br class="">
the relationship throughout the
years, as we have with<br class="">
so many<br class="">
organizations, we are faced with a
decision now that<br class="">
involves both<br class="">
foundations and 1,000,000 USD (the
annual FOSS4G event<br class="">
generates a<br class="">
lot of revenue, making this very
attractive to<br class="">
professional<br class="">
conference companies all over the
world, I was phoned<br class="">
yesterday by<br class="">
one from Europe, for example). The
money is there, huge<br class="">
money, and<br class="">
huge exposure for these companies.
And their jobs are on<br class="">
the line,<br class="">
in their minds. Hence this
situation we are forced to<br class="">
deal with<br class="">
now, and these nasty private
messages being sent to me.<br class="">
<br class="">
Let's try to remain positive
though, as we have 3 great<br class="">
bids for<br class="">
FOSS4G 2017, and a solid team
working hard already to<br class="">
make<br class="">
FOSS4G-2016 in Bonn another amazing
event. OSGeo has<br class="">
never been so<br class="">
active and vibrant as so many
initiatives and location<br class="">
chapters grow<br class="">
all around the world.<br class="">
<br class="">
Thanks for listening, and thank you
Jody for bringing<br class="">
this<br class="">
topic to<br class="">
the public lists.<br class="">
<br class="">
-jeff<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">From: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">Andrea Ross
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:andrea.ross@eclipse.org"><andrea.ross@eclipse.org></a><br class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">Date: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">15 November
2015 at 19:49:34 GMT<br class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">To: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">Massimiliano
Cannata <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:massimiliano.cannata@supsi.ch"><massimiliano.cannata@supsi.ch></a><br
class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">Cc: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class="">OSGeo
Discussions <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:discuss@lists.osgeo.org"><discuss@lists.osgeo.org></a><br
class="">
</span></div>
<div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px;
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;" class=""><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:rgba(127, 127, 127,
1.0);" class=""><b class="">Subject: </b></span><span
style="font-family: -webkit-system-font, Helvetica
Neue, Helvetica, sans-serif;" class=""><b class="">Re:
[OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship</b><br
class="">
</span></div>
<br class="">
<br class="">
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8"
http-equiv="Content-Type" class="">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Dear Massimiliano,<br
class="">
<br class="">
Your opinion matters a great deal. I don't know if you
realized: what you have suggested should be, is pretty
much what is the case. Let me explain to hopefully
show this is so.<br class="">
<br class="">
This is all covered <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/15x1Q3J9OPM95jEkeZhYlU0xB5uO9V9NCOI28g5B_Yqc/edit"
class="">in the FAQ</a> to try to make it clear
& quick to read for any who are interested.<br
class="">
<br class="">
The people who put together the bids for Ottawa &
Philadelphia did something positive and bid on hosting
FOSS4G in their cities. As part of their bid, they
very clearly stated that OSGeo would have the very
best visibility it has ever had at any FOSS4G ever and
a payment on par with the best ever without any
downside risk. In that same sense that FOSS4G has ever
been "hosted" or "organized" or whatever word
preferred, by OSGeo, it would be the same, should
those cities be selected.<br class="">
<br class="">
The way the process works, the bid team select whom
they wish to organize the logistics. And they reached
out to LocationTech to hear what they could offer.
Using Ottawa as an example (Dave McIlhagga, chair for
Ottawa, shared all of this in public on the conf-dev
list), after hearing the offer, they decided that they
wanted LocationTech to help them organize the
conference. For what it's worth, the other conference
organizing firms who participated in the meeting &
also heard what was being offered, and said openly,
clearly, and unmistakably that they felt choosing
LocationTech was the right choice.<br class="">
<br class="">
Also covered in the FAQ, LocationTech does organize
many events beyond FOSS4G. And, for what it's worth,
OSGeo projects & initiatives have always been
welcome at those events. The FAQ also details why
there's interest in FOSS4G. It is my hope that you
& others find it all quite reasonable.<br class="">
<br class="">
Kind regards,<br class="">
<br class="">
Andrea<br class="">
<br class="">
On 15/11/15 20:05, Massimiliano Cannata wrote:<br
class="">
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAMKYQEu4K4XYc9901zUSCzMxtX-cTjZq3kuTh=maR9eGnNTyag@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite" class="">
<p dir="ltr" class="">Andrea<br class="">
Nevertheless in my simple and neligible opinion and
understanding OSGeo never wanted to organize any
apache event.</p>
<p dir="ltr" class="">If valuable OSGeo members want
to host and organize foss4g they can certainly do in
their name or in the name of their local chapters
leaving out LocationTech from the bussines. If LT
want to be at the osgeo event they can send proposal
and see if they will be accepted and then they are
always welcome as a sponsor.</p>
<p dir="ltr" class="">If we can see that "osgeo" and
LT are "sister" organizations then LT could also
have a free both and be listed as partner along with
other organizations.</p>
<p dir="ltr" class="">Otherwayaround why LT does not
organize its own event and then let it be organized
by osgeo?</p>
<p dir="ltr" class="">Regards<br class="">
Massimiliano</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">Il 15/Nov/2015 18:48, "Andrea
Ross" <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:andrea.ross@eclipse.org" class="">andrea.ross@eclipse.org</a>>
ha scritto:<br type="attribution" class="">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On
13/11/15 15:42, Mateusz Loskot wrote:<br class="">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0
0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex"> On 13 November 2015 at
14:24, Jeff McKenna<br class="">
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com"
target="_blank" class="">jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com</a>>
wrote:<br class="">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0
0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex"> why would you create
a separate<br class="">
foundation with the exact same goals, and then
later come back to the other<br class="">
foundation saying "no, we love you. Give us
the right to run your event".<br class="">
</blockquote>
Bang!<br class="">
<br class="">
Jeff, thank you.<br class="">
<br class="">
Best regards,<br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
Jeff, Mateusz<br class="">
<br class="">
I have answered this in my other email but I'll
repeat here too in case it's helpful. LocationTech
was founded, by many of the same founders and
champions of OSGeo, to fill a gap. It has done a
pretty good job of this. A bunch of what it does,
isn't getting done elsewhere and is needed. None
of this was intended to harm OSGeo in any way, and
so far as I can see, hasn't even after 3 years.
Feel free to provide any evidence you can offer to
the contrary.<br class="">
<br class="">
People can and do participate in both OSGeo &
LocationTech all the time. This is a good thing.
It absolutely isn't a zero sum scenario. The
mutually reinforce each other rather than detract
from one another.<br class="">
<br class="">
Apache existed before OSGeo so the same argument
could be used there. While I can see how it plays
to emotions, I'm not sure it's a useful argument.<br
class="">
<br class="">
Andrea<br class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>