<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><sorry for cross posting></font>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">I have been involved in a number
of discussions over the last year or so where people representing organisations
have expressed an interest in extending Open Source spatial products and
projects but are unsure or sceptical as to how it could be done.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">I'm interested in other people's thoughts
on this.</font>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Overview:</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Typically in Government and other larger
organisations, funding is Project based with a clear definition of business
requirements, end deliverables and time frame.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">What I have seen of OS projects over
the last seven years or so is that they are typically run by a group of
committed individuals who have a desire for a particular type of product.
Focus is often on delivering a quality product that is released 'when it
is ready' rather than to a marketing department's timeframe. While there
is often an end goal and a set of requirements for a release of a product,
it is sometimes difficult to find people interested in spending their own
time on the less exciting aspects of a project. </font>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">For some context:</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">#1 - I recently attended an workshop
that contained representatives from a significant number of government
departments from around Australia. There was a general consensus that we
liked what we saw with GeoNetwork as a potential 'National' Metadata entry
tool and Catalogue. There was also some discussion as to the types of features
that we'd like to see developed longer term to support an 'Australian'
metadata toolset. If this was to proceed we'd no doubt end up with a program
of works that we'd like to see implemented.</font>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">#2 - I have also been involved on the
periphery of the GeoSciML efforts, part of which is a desire to use GeoServer
to support GeoSciML and 'complex' objects. The GeoSciML work involves a
number of Geological Survey organisations from around the world. This could
also result in a program of works that people would like to see included
into GeoServer.</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Some initial examples of issues that
I can see (excluding funding) are:</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">- Communication and liaison with the
relevant open source community. We may have a block of work that we'd like
to see developed, however this may potentially take a project in a direction
that the community does not want to go in. How do we address this?</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">- A shortage of developers with the
required skills in a particular project. While we could put resources towards
this problem, it will take time for the developers to get an understanding
of the products and build the necessary credibility within the community.
In the meantime, we have the problem of getting some early wins to ensure
sufficient funding for the longer term.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">- Project based funding is typically
focussed on a deliverable. The deliverable may well be an enhancement to
an OSGeo project. How can a development team get that enhancement accepted
into an OSGeo Project's code base in a timely manner? Can they be confident
that the enhancement would not be removed at a later iteration of the OSGeo
Project?</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">- Where is the best place to discuss
issues relating to a program of works that may span several OSGeo projects?</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> + If the discussions were to
take place on individual projects' development lists, then the overall
'Program' context may be lost. Also other OSGeo project developers may
not be interested in the additional 'noise'.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> + In the first example above
where it relates to a National program of works, it may be better to discuss
these issues on the country's local chapter mailing list. At least this
would still be visible to interested parties.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> + In the second example where
it relates to an international program of works, perhaps a dedicated chapter
could be established under OSGeo? </font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif"> + what would be the best way
to coordinate the aims of a program of works and the aims of various OSGeo
communities.</font>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">I'm sure that others are thinking of
these issues. </font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">They don't just relate to large programs
of works, they also relate to smaller projects.</font>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Perhaps you would like to share your
thoughts.</font>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Bruce</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>Notice:</FONT><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ff0000"><BR></FONT><FONT size=2><FONT face=Arial>This
email and any attachments may contain information that is personal,
confidential,<BR>legally privileged and/or copyright.</FONT> <FONT face=Arial>No
part of it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated </FONT><FONT
face=Arial>without the prior written consent of the copyright owner.
</FONT></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=2><FONT face=Arial>It is the responsibility of the recipient to
check for and remove viruses.</FONT></FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2>If you have received this email in error, please
notify the sender by return email, delete it from your system and destroy any
copies. You are not authorised to use, communicate or rely on the information
contained in this email.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Arial color=#008000 size=2>Please consider the environment before
printing this email.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </P>
<P> </P>
<P> </P>