<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><expanding this conversation to the
OSGeo Discuss list><br>
<br>
Hi Jody,<br>
You make valid points about different levels of contribution.<br>
They are equally valid for the OSGeo-Advocate page too.<br>
My key point is that we should use consistent taxonomy (terms)
between different lists, so that it is easy for people to mix and
match information between different sources. If need be, we
potentially should be updating the terms used on the
OSGeo-Advocate list to match terms used for OSGeo Sponsorship.<br>
<br>
I think that your struggle identifying sponsorship levels is
probably systematic of something we have not fully acknowledged.<br>
<br>
<b>Namely, we within Open Source communities such as OSGeo value
people's time more than we value money.</b><br>
<br>
OSGeo people and companies contribute huge amounts of time into
OSGeo projects, which is significantly more valuable to us than
financial sponsorship. This time is usually given freely by
individuals, from their spare time, or given freely by companies,
who have worked out a way to give code back to open source code
bases as part of paid work.<br>
<br>
A typical OSGeo volunteer developer gives ~ $50,000 worth of their
time per year to OSGeo.<br>
(10 hrs/wk) * (50 wks/yr )* ($100/hr) = $50,000 p.a.<br>
<br>
I'd extend this further to suggest that we are a meritocracy, and
we trade on reputation. Reputation is earned through a
contribution of both time and the value of the advice given.<br>
<br>
What we are really looking for when discussing sponsorship levels
is a way to describe the reputation of our members to those
external to OSGeo.<br>
<br>
It doesn't feel quite right that a company can buy reputation
(through sponsorship), and in particular, get greater
acknowledgement and opportunities than someone who has worked hard
and built a personal reputation based on merit within the
community.<br>
<br>
With brings us back to the question of:<br>
Do we want to be a low capital or high capital organisation?<br>
<br>
Low capital = we trade on time and reputation, without much money
changing hands. For the most part, finances are handled externally
to OSGeo. I think this aligns with our natural DNA.<br>
<br>
High capital = first we chase sponsorship, then we hire people
into paid positions. It means we need to spend quite a bit of time
selling instead of developing, but it means we could pay for
things like travel of key staff. It is a commercial business
model, more closely aligned with how LocationTech has been set up.<br>
<br>
Both work. Both have advantages, but you can't have the best of
both no downsides.<br>
<br>
On 22/11/2015 4:03 am, Jody Garnett wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAOhbgAmWFDWsuL6VpYT1KiXXg4QZQ=ECCpUQkh2OWjKEHOMO5Q@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">Thanks for the archive link, does not quite capture
the level of project commitment I was trying to capture. There is
a vast difference between a contributor and committer. There is an
equally vast difference between a committer and a maintainer (who
has made an ongoing time commitment). <br>
<br>
For recognizing organizations we are focused o those who are
providing an ongoing commitment. Perhaps it would be best not to
have levels for this one and just list organizations who have made
such a statement.<br>
<br>
If anyone has other ideas here it would be great, we are trying to
figure out a way to acknowledge participating organizations based
on time (rather than just sponsorship which relies on money - and
can be an unjust measurement around the world ). </blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 21/11/2015 7:59 pm, Cameron Shorter
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:56503284.4000408@gmail.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
Hi Jody,<br>
Yes, I've raised a ticket with the OSGeo SAC to look into it.<br>
Seems the page is too big, or there is something about the syntax
on the page which doesn't work with the upgraded osgeo wiki.<br>
In the meantime, try the archive page here:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://web.archive.org/web/20150302070905/http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Advocate#Understanding_OSGeo_roles">https://web.archive.org/web/20150302070905/http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Advocate#Understanding_OSGeo_roles</a><br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 21/11/2015 6:43 pm, Jody Garnett
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAOhbgAmbwS5R-tsPmO0kp0_dtkGpmrGuYAScaH4j36AFXcnTVw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">The link you provided does respond? Is it correct
..</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all">
<div>
<div class="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>--</div>
<div>Jody Garnett</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 20 November 2015 at 02:16, Cameron
Shorter <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:cameron.shorter@gmail.com" target="_blank">cameron.shorter@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span
class=""><br>
<br>
On 20/11/2015 1:58 am, Jody Garnett wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> -
Leadership - project steering committee or similar
responsible for decision making<br>
- Maintainer - module maintainer, responsible for code
reviews, release, build server or some other aspect of
project health and happiness.<br>
- Committer - obtained commit permission on a project<br>
- Contributor - submitted functionality or fix that
passed code review and was included in a release<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</span> Hi Jody,<br>
When selecting roles, I suggest aligning with the terms
used by the OSGeo Advocate page:<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Advocate#Understanding_OSGeo_roles"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Advocate#Understanding_OSGeo_roles</a><br>
<br>
-- <br>
Cameron Shorter,<br>
Software and Data Solutions Manager<br>
LISAsoft<br>
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,<br>
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009<br>
<br>
P <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:%2B61%202%209009%205000" value="+61290095000"
target="_blank">+61 2 9009 5000</a>, W <a
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.lisasoft.com"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.lisasoft.com">www.lisasoft.com</a></a>, F
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="tel:%2B61%202%209009%205099" value="+61290095099"
target="_blank">+61 2 9009 5099</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Board mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Board@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">Board@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board</a></blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
LISAsoft
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
P +61 2 9009 5000, W <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.lisasoft.com">www.lisasoft.com</a>, F +61 2 9009 5099</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
LISAsoft
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
P +61 2 9009 5000, W <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.lisasoft.com">www.lisasoft.com</a>, F +61 2 9009 5099</pre>
</body>
</html>