[Board] USGIF Conference and diatribe on where we are heading

Wed Oct 26 08:52:11 PDT 2011

Peter, Arnulf, Mark (I think?), and I have agreed in principle for travelling for this.

Frank, Daniel, Jeff, Jo, Tim?

-mpg

> -----Original Message-----
> From: board-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:board-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Seven (aka Arnulf)
> Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 8:15 PM
> To: board at lists.osgeo.org
> Subject: Re: [Board] USGIF Conference and diatribe on where we are heading
> 
> On 10/26/2011 01:44 AM, Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
> > All:
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm glad Mark sent this, as I've been pretty discouraged since our IRC
> > meeting a couple weeks ago.
> >
> >
> >
> > I thought the f2f board meeting after foss4g was very effective and got
> > us off to a good start, and leaving Denver I had high hopes we could
> > address OSGeo's strategic issues.  However, the subsequent meeting -
> > held via IRC - has led me to start to understand why OSGeo has stalled
> > out on the strategic side over the past couple years:
> >
> >
> >
> > IRC and email are simply the wrong way for the board to have any sort of
> > meaningful discussion
> >
> > about "big picture" things of the scope Mark is bringing up.
> >
> >
> >
> > Some weeks ago we "stepped back from a core staff" for two reasons:  our
> > current financial posture is unhealthy and our current staff was not
> > seen as the best choice as to how to improve that situation.  The more I
> > look at OSGeo right now, the more I am confident we did the right
> > thing.  And I too want to see OSGeo rebuild itself with a clearer set of
> > goals and objectives.  But I've yet to see any consensus on what those
> > goals might be, or how we might develop a business plan to get there.
> >
> > As the Board, it is our responsibility to set those goals and develop
> > that plan, and we already agreed that, where justified, OSGeo should pay
> > for additional in-person meetings.  Therefore, I propose we meet in
> > person as soon as is practical to continue the work started in Denver,
> > to decide in what direction we want to grow and make concrete plans for
> > how to get there.
> >
> >
> >
> > As secretary, I would be happy to organize a meeting space here in
> > Seattle or anywhere else that might be convenient.  All we need is a
> > hotel conference room near a major airport hub for a couple days.
> >
> >
> >
> > -mpg
> 
> Michael,
> I support this and am prepared to invest the time to make this possible.
> We should also make reimbursement of travel and accomodation a part of
> the OSGeo budget allowing all board members to participate regardless
> from where they come.
> 
> Best regards,
> Arnulf
> 
> > *From:*board-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
> > [mailto:board-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] *On Behalf Of *Mark Lucas
> > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 25, 2011 7:54 AM
> > *To:* OSGeo-Board List
> > *Subject:* [Board] USGIF Conference and diatribe on where we are heading
> >
> >
> >
> > Just got back from the 2011 Geoint Conference in San Antonio Texas.
> >
> > http://geoint2011.com/
> >
> >
> >
> > The USGIF is the conference for geospatial intelligence in the US.  This
> > year there were over 5000 attendees (138 from overseas- mostly foreign
> > military).
> >
> >
> >
> > There over 250  booths and paying sponsors (> 100,000 sq ft of exhibit
> > space) .  They have built this organization up to support a full time
> > staff, multiple events throughout the year, media publications etc.
> >
> > http://www.gotgeoint.com/
> >
> >
> >
> > For the first time, we were able to get on the agenda with an OSS panel.
> >
> > http://geointv.com/archive/geoint-2011-breakout-demonstration-of-military-relevant-open-source-geospatial-software/
> >
> >
> >
> > Open source software is suddenly interesting because of dramatic budget
> > cuts that are planned for most of the agencies.
> >
> >
> >
> > Most of the presentations are online at: http://geointv.com/
> >
> >
> >
> > NSA and NGA both made announcements related to their focus on open
> > source software.
> >
> >
> >
> > As the US government shows increasing interest in open source software
> > solutions the existing contractors will try to align themselves with
> > those capabilities.
> >
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately, this comes at a time when the OSGeo has stepped back from
> > a core staff and is uncertain about holding annual NA conferences.
> >  Indeed, there almost seems to be a reluctance to focus on raising
> > revenue for the organization - instead focusing on how to allocate what
> > we have to code sprints, travel, etc.
> >
> >
> >
> > We want to support the building of open source geospatial software.  I
> > would contend that we can do more if we (the board) focus on running the
> > organization more like a business.
> >
> >
> >
> > We already do a great job on supporting development.  If we add more
> > attention to business models I believe that we have a window of
> > opportunity to attract sponsorship from some of the many players that
> > already support USGIF.  If the US government continues to move towards
> > OSS, many contractors will want to brand themselves with an OSS
> > approach, resources, development and operational support.
> >
> >
> >
> > If we do not focus on this we will simply lose the opportunity to USGIF,
> > MIL-OSS, OSFA, OSSI or other organizations that will aggressively step
> > forward.
> >
> >
> >
> > In either case OSGeo projects will become a valuable resource.  As I
> > mentioned before, I was able to convince RadiantBlue to make a $30k
> > investment as a platinum foss4g sponsor based on the trends we see
> > developing.  I'd like to continue and expand that support, but can only
> > do that if there is a business case to be made.
> >
> >
> >
> > I feel that we have fallen backwards.  We failed to raise sponsorship
> > and revenue in order to sustain and grow the organization.  That led to
> > decision to cut expenses with the removal of the ED.  I get the feeling
> > that some on the board are comfortable with the status quo.  It is
> > probably clear that I'm in a different camp - we need to raise revenue,
> > get back to where we can support core staff, and grow the organization
> > on a couple of fronts.  A litmus test for me will be a decision on the
> > annual NA conference.
> >
> >
> >
> > I feel that this is a discussion we should quickly settle one way or the
> > other and I'd appreciate any feedback in advance of the next board
> > meeting.  Either way I'll continue to be a strong supporter and user of
> > OSGeo projects - its just that we all need to decide where we are going
> > to focus and put our energies.
> >
> >
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Board mailing list
> > Board at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
> 
> 
> --
> Exploring Space, Time and Mind
> http://arnulf.us
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board