[OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
Jachym Cepicky
jachym.cepicky at gmail.com
Mon Sep 15 13:10:10 PDT 2014
Daniel, I would see this similarly, thanks
J
Send from cellphone
--
Jachym Cepicky
e-mail: jachym.cepicky gmail com
URL: http://les-ejk.cz
GPG: http://les-ejk.cz/pgp/JachymCepicky.pgp
Give your code freedom with PyWPS -http://pywps.wald.intevation.org
On Sep 15, 2014 6:31 PM, "Daniel Morissette" <dmorissette at mapgears.com>
wrote:
> Hi Maxi, All,
>
> You raise an excellent question and the answer varies depending on what
> one is looking for. This whole discussion should help understand why both
> organizations are complementary and not really competing that much.
>
> Jody and Rob already pointed out some similarities and differences related
> to software projects and incubation so I won't touch on that.
>
> In my case, the motivation to get involved with LocationTech is for the
> business aspect: I am a citizen of both the software developer community
> (with MapServer, GDAL, etc.) and the business community (with Mapgears),
> and while OSGeo does a great job for the software community, it is lacking
> on the business side and I see hope in what LocationTech is trying to build.
>
> Why two orgs you'll ask? Can't OSGeo do it all? Can't LocationTech do it
> all? I don't think a single organization can address all the needs of all
> people. So diversity is good and allows different orgs to have different
> and complementary priorities and strengths, and if those orgs work together
> on the parts that overlap that will be in the best interest of the overall
> community of people, businesses, institutions, etc who care about free/open
> source geo software.
>
> So what's different in LocationTech? My opinion is that the main
> differences between the two orgs start with their different structure and
> history: the members in OSGeo are individuals and the members in
> Eclipse/LocationTech are businesses. This leads to setting the priorities
> differently and using different approaches to reach the same goal of
> supporting open source software. Essentially the result is that today OSGeo
> is more community oriented, and LocationTech is more business-oriented.
>
> Before someone says that I'm over-generalizing, I know that OSGeo has many
> businesses revolving around it (including Mapgears, and we're not going
> anyway), and LocationTech has project committers reps on its board, so both
> are not purely black or white. But the core of each org is very different,
> we need to recognize that and work on those strenghts.
>
> BTW, on a side note, 8 years ago I would have said that OSGeo is
> software-project-driven, but I seem to have noticed a shift over the years
> towards education and community. Not that this is a problem or that
> projects are less important than they used to be, but just that the
> membership has grown with more community and academic people than software
> people, and that resulted in a small shift of priorities. Maybe it's also
> that software projects have a bit less needs now that their basic needs are
> served, and the next challenges are on the education and community side?
> I'm not saying this is a bad thing at all (quite the contrary), just
> pointing out that this shift is happening and as part of the evolution of
> our organizations (OSGeo, LocationTech and others) other shifts are to be
> expected over the coming years.
>
> Back to OSGeo vs LocationTech: both approaches have their pros and cons,
> and no one is better than the other, they are complementary and
> LocationTech aims to fill a void for businesses that OSGeo could not
> address well due to its nature. Having both is a good thing, and if they
> can find a way to cooperate efficiently then we all win.
>
> Having two orgs doesn't mean that people or projects need to choose a
> camp. I believe projects could incubate under both orgs to reach their
> different communities as others pointed out already, but that should not be
> a requirement, and it is also perfectly fine for individuals to play on
> both fronts as I, Jody and a few others do. For instance in my case as I
> wrote already, I am in OSGeo for the software developer network that it
> provides me, and in LocationTech for the business network that it is aiming
> to build.
>
> For those who still don't see the complementarity between OSGeo and
> LocationTech after reading the multiple replies in this thread, think of
> the coo-petition between MapServer, GeoServer and Mapnik, or between
> OpenLayers and Leaflet. That kind of diversity is good and we treat it as
> friendly coo-petition (or most of us do anyway), and it leads to faster
> evolution, and many users use all of the above on different days /
> different projects depending on the specific needs/features they are
> looking for. Open Source doesn't force you to choose a camp, you just use
> the best tool for the task you are working on at a given time. Why could it
> not be the same with OSGeo vs LocationTech as coo-peting orgs addressing
> different needs?
>
> Daniel
>
> P.S. FWIW, I am not going away from OSGeo, I plan to continue to be
> involved in both OSGeo and LocationTech since they both serve different
> needs for me.
>
>
>
> On 14-09-14 6:44 PM, Massimiliano Cannata wrote:
>
>> As you said the final goal is the same: open source Geospatial software
>> affirmation. And this is the best thing I can wish to all of us.
>>
>> Nevertheless what I just have not clear is: what location teach do
>> differently with respect to osgeo? does it somehow overlap with
>> incubation or not? What are the distinctive features?
>>
>> Personally I wonder why some of the most eminent person of osgeo (like
>> you) decided to work into location teach? Don't misunderstood me, I'm
>> not judging nor criticizing, I'd just like to understand opportunities
>> or aspect or services not found in osgeo and that experts and leaders
>> found there.
>>
>> Sorry in advance for my eventual ignorance, but I think this would help
>> people better understand the discussion and the future of osgeo.
>>
>> Maxi
>>
>> Il 14-set-2014 17:05 "Daniel Morissette" <dmorissette at mapgears.com
>> <mailto:dmorissette at mapgears.com>> ha scritto:
>>
>> FWIW I'm happy to hear that there was such a face to face
>> discussion. I believe that open communication on the issues will be
>> the best way to address the fears and find ways to move forward in
>> the best interest of the overall worldwide community of people,
>> businesses, institutions, etc who have a common interest in seeing
>> free and open source geospatial software strive.
>>
>> Keep in mind that we all come to this model of software development
>> for different reasons (business, academic, philosophical, hobby,
>> etc.), but in the end we're all working towards a similar objective,
>> so there is no fear to be had, just different means of reaching a
>> common objective, and since the result of everybody's actions is
>> better free/open source software, everybody will benefit in the end.
>>
>> Not sure if I was able to relay my thoughts properly... maybe I need
>> a bit more sleep.
>>
>> Cheers all
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>>
>> On 14-09-14 10:25 AM, Jachym Cepicky wrote:
>>
>> Guys,
>>
>> as long as I understand it: "some members of the community" are
>> scared
>> of LocationTech "taking over" whatever (FOSS4G conference, OSGeo
>> projects and community). This can be based on real action, taken
>> on
>> either site, unofficial statement, misunderstandings or personal
>> dislikes.
>>
>> Yesterday, we had short (about 2hours) face 2 face discussion with
>> Andrew here in PDX (me, Vasile, Jeff and Gerald) and I personally
>> believe, that it is not in interest of LocationTech to "crush"
>> OSGeo
>> or FOSS4G conference. It was clearly stated, that LocationTech
>> would
>> like to contribute to FOSS4G and make it to better conference,
>> regarding (again) "some remarks" of "some members of the
>> community"
>> (including myself), that the way, FOSS4G is organised, does not
>> necessary meet some of the community aspects, we would like to
>> stress.
>> I would like to note, that the discussion was very open on both
>> sides,
>> still calm and productive.
>>
>> "To contribute" of course means "to work" and LocationTech is
>> anything
>> but volunteer driven organisation. It has been stated, that
>> FOSS4G-NA
>> next year will be organised primarily by LocationTech, but OSGeo
>> willl
>> be represented clearly and (so to say) loudly.
>>
>> This could be one of the firsts steps towards closer cooperation
>> between LocationTech and OSGeo.
>>
>> Everybody is aware, that on some points, LocationTech is not that
>> good, as OSGeo currently is. OSGeo is certainly failing in other
>> things. Looking for ways, how to strengthen common strengths and
>> weaken our weaknesses should have "non-zero-sum" effect.
>>
>> We, as OSGeo shall later evaluate, whether the price for helping
>> us
>> LocationTech with conferences (regardless if on regional or global
>> level), was too hight or quite ok. In case of disagreement, we
>> shall
>> try to find solution for the next time.
>>
>> In the worst case, we find out, that cooperation is not possible
>> and
>> everybody can go it's way than.
>>
>> I hope, you get my point(s) and that I did not misinterpreted
>> anything, what was said.
>>
>> Thank you
>>
>>
>> Jachym
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Daniel Morissette
>> T: +1 418-696-5056 #201
>> http://www.mapgears.com/
>> Provider of Professional MapServer Support since 2000
>> _________________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/__mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> <http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>
> --
> Daniel Morissette
> T: +1 418-696-5056 #201
> http://www.mapgears.com/
> Provider of Professional MapServer Support since 2000
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140915/05a9c143/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Discuss
mailing list