<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Dear All,<br>
<br>
Discussions started informally back in 2011. By 2012, there were
more formal discussions ongoing including a face to face meeting
with Michael Gerlek who was appointed by the OSGeo board to
represent OSGeo. I wanted to say publicly that Michael's work was
extremely professional and I was very impressed.<br>
<br>
I believe it's fair to say reaction was similar back then. Many
people saw many positives in working closely together. Some asked
if the two organizations could be one. Like today, there were some
who were very fearful. Those that supported working closely
together felt it was best not to push too hard. Discussions have
continued since then over the past 3-4 years focusing on specific
collaboration on a case by case basis.<br>
<br>
During that time, LocationTech has sponsored and its projects
participated in 2 FOSS4Gs. It was asked by an OSGeo board member
to organize FOSS4G NA 2015. It has provided discrete feedback to
OSGeo projects regarding intellectual property related issues in
OSGeo projects so they could be fixed. OSGeo projects were well
represented on the 2013 LocationTech tour and again in 2014. I
hope these things are seen as a significant positive force.<br>
<br>
I would like to draw attention to the fact that LocationTech's
growth has not taken anything away from OSGeo. In fairness,
building upon what Steven Feldman eloquently put, the problems
OSGeo faces are problems today were faced before LocationTech
existed, and since.<br>
<br>
It's fair to say there is tension to collaborate more closely
since the strengths of OSGeo & LocationTech complement each
other despite some overlap. LocationTech & the Eclipse
Foundation are *offering* to help solve some of the problems we've
been talking about in OSGeo for many years. It's been 4 years and
the offer hasn't been withdrawn nor really pushed despite fearful
attempts to portray it as otherwise.<br>
<br>
Andrew<br>
<br>
On 15/09/14 20:28, Venkatesh Raghavan wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:5417A03F.3010206@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9/16/2014 10:48 AM, Richard
Greenwood wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAHBySPYqyAGBc1TxRjzpzcYiyzdG8h7ZTMjMc8bXM2AagB=DDw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I don't get it, and my question is moot at this point in time, but why do
we need a new foundation? Why couldn't OSGeo have provided what
LocationTech purports to provide? Was there any discussion, or awareness,
in the OSGeo board prior to the formation of LocationTech?</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Very pertinent questions form Rich. I hope we will receive some
lucid answers.<br>
<br>
Best<br>
<br>
Venka<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAHBySPYqyAGBc1TxRjzpzcYiyzdG8h7ZTMjMc8bXM2AagB=DDw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Rich
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Jeff McKenna <<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com">jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com</a>
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">wrote:
</pre>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Arnulf,
I definitely agree that both foundations fill a role and need to exist.
The point I am trying to make is that we have the power to change OSGeo,
if we feel some needs are not being met well.
I used too strong of words again, I am sorry.
-jeff
On 2014-09-15 2:59 PM, Arnulf Christl wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Jeff,
I believe that Daniel is actually right in what he says - given that I
understand the point he is trying to make. There are differences
between OSGeo and LocationTech and trying to talk them away will not
get us anywhere. And its not "bad" or "goo" either way, we just
operate differently.
The point is that in OSGeo you cannot move anything at all as a
business, not directly. In LocationTech you become a corporate member,
pay money and in return have influence over certain things and get
support. Directly geared towards your specific needs. OSGeo does none
of those things.
As an individual (with or without business) you can become the
committee chair and an OSGeo officer with absolutely no preconditions,
no money needed, no organizational backing and no other hierarchy.
Just because othes think you are doing a cool job and have accumulated
enough merit to go ahead as a leader. This would not work in this way
in LocationTech.
Both ways have reasons to exist and are good. Right?
Cheers.
Arnulf
Am 2014-09-15 10:45, schrieb Jeff McKenna:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On 2014-09-15 1:22 PM, Daniel Morissette wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">the members in OSGeo are individuals and the members in
Eclipse/LocationTech are businesses
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Daniel this statement is not true, regarding OSGeo. OSGeo members
are made up of all walks of life, and many are running private
businesses all around the world. I have visited their
organizations/offices myself in my FOSS4G travels throughout the
years.
However I cannot change how you feel.
This part is unfortunate, these strong statements made publicly,
which I feel are made to divide our community.
Let me reinforce: our OSGeo community and our FOSS4G events (of
all sizes) are geared for everyone and anyone, with no sole focus
on one type of community. And as the President of OSGeo, I am
happy to represent all of the members, of any kind :)
-jeff
_______________________________________________
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>