<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Dear Massimiliano,<br>
<br>
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>
<br>
This is all covered <a
href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/15x1Q3J9OPM95jEkeZhYlU0xB5uO9V9NCOI28g5B_Yqc/edit">in
the FAQ</a> to try to make it clear & quick to read for any
who are interested.<br>
<br>
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>
<br>
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>
<br>
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>
<br>
Kind regards,<br>
<br>
Andrea<br>
<br>
On 15/11/15 20:05, Massimiliano Cannata wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAMKYQEu4K4XYc9901zUSCzMxtX-cTjZq3kuTh=maR9eGnNTyag@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<p dir="ltr">Andrea<br>
Nevertheless in my simple and neligible opinion and
understanding OSGeo never wanted to organize any apache event.</p>
<p dir="ltr">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">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">Otherwayaround why LT does not organize its own event
and then let it be organized by osgeo?</p>
<p dir="ltr">Regards<br>
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">andrea.ross@eclipse.org</a>>
ha scritto:<br type="attribution">
<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>
<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>
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com"
target="_blank">jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
<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>
foundation with the exact same goals, and then later come
back to the other<br>
foundation saying "no, we love you. Give us the right to
run your event".<br>
</blockquote>
Bang!<br>
<br>
Jeff, thank you.<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Jeff, Mateusz<br>
<br>
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>
<br>
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>
<br>
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>
<br>
Andrea<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Discuss mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Discuss@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Discuss@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a></blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>