Islandwood Code sprint (was Re: [Board] New MOUs proposed...)

Tue Sep 6 08:55:03 PDT 2011

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Howard,
thanks for your straight forward manner of approaching this and no, you
are not a jerk and yes, I concur that this is what OSGeo is about and we
should find a way of getting this done. During our F2F we should come to
a conclusion about how to do it. More inline.

On 06.09.2011 15:57, Howard Butler wrote:
> 
> On Sep 6, 2011, at 8:30 AM, Daniel Morissette wrote:
> 
>> On 11-09-04 04:45 AM, Jo Work wrote:
>>> 
>>> However, (and excuse the newbie for speaking out of turn), a few
>>> things bother me. The first, is that it does set a precedent for
>>> people asking for help in the future- what's to stop any local
>>> chapter or event organiser asking in future- sure we can always
>>> say no but don't we need a framework in place to avoid
>>> accusations of favouritism?
>>> 
>> 
>> This is alos my main concern: I am worried that this would set a
>> precedent, without a clear framework to decide to support or not
>> other events in the future.
>> 
>> I guess the obvious response will be "let's define this framework
>> then"... but I fear that won't be as easy as it sounds.
> 
> Isn't the board already the framework that decides what activities
> fit within OSGeo's mission on a case-by-case basis?  Otherwise, we're
> in an endless loop of committees and frameworks when the actual
> decision still boils down to the board and its willingness or not to
> act.

Yes an no. There are directors on board who could be seen as directly
profiting from OSGeo sponsoring things.

This is a general issue which sometimes prevents things from happening
but at the same time it is a good problem to have. It is also why some
projects did not opt in for the project sponsorship program, and maybe
also the reason why very little money has gone through these potential
channels yet.

> Simply:
> 
> - Do we have the money? 

This is aquestion of opinion, nothing that can be hammered out as a
singular truth. My understanding is yes, that we have the money. Other
who might want to take less risk or have more stakes in it might be more
conservative in their judgement. This is why we have diversity on the
board. If I was the only one deciding how to spend money we would
probably not have any reserve at all. :-)

(we don't know how much money we have, it
> seems) 

We do know how much money we have now, this is not the problem. But the
further we look into the future the more this number becomes a
probability. This is just regular business, nobody knows the expact
numbers half a year ahead if any of the sponsors can at any time decide
to not continue to sponsor OSGeo.

- - Does it fit our mission? (it's unclear what our mission is

These are several things.
1. Yes it fits our mission
2. Our mission is clear: OSGeo ...created to support and build the
highest-quality open source geospatial software. Our goal is to
encourage the use and collaborative development of community-led
projects. Join us by signing up to our mailing lists or check out the
Getting Started page to become more involved.

Then:
"The foundation provides financial, organizational and legal support to
the broader open source geospatial community." [2]

> and everyone has a different idea on this one) -

Yes, and this is good because it is also our mission to be a broadly
inclusive gloabl organization. By definition this is a pretty broad
perspective. It means that we sometimes do different things at the same
time. The alternative is to decide which one we prioritize. We are not
very good at prioritizing, in part due to not wanting to take money from
a not-for-profit organization - see above - to avoid favoritism.

> Do we trust the
> folks acting on our behalf? (pretty sure the answer to this is yes
> :)

Who are you refering to? Concretely Michael Gerlek as organizer of the
code sprint? In this case I absolutely trust and vouch for him. Who are
the others acting on OSGeo's behalf? The directors, Tyler (on behalf of
the board), all Local Chapter chairs and project and committee chairs.
They have all at one point been elected by people who trust them, so
chances are hight that we can trust them all.

> How is the framework anything more than that?

Well, as said above the framework needs funds to make any sense. If the
board is not prepared to take the risk based on the current numbers we
have to change the numbers by either using our funds differently or we
have to acquire more funding.

For the latter I want to again propose that we implement a bounty system
for fund raisers. Anybody who gets a new sponsor for OSGeo receives a
percentage of the sponsorhip. It should be simple enough to implement,
does not cost us anything and if it does not work we can drop it again.

Cheers,
Arnulf

> Howard_______________________________________________ Board mailing
> list Board at lists.osgeo.org 
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board

[1] http://www.osgeo.org/
[2] http://www.osgeo.org/about

- -- 
Exploring Space, Time and Mind
http://arnulf.us
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk5mQlcACgkQXmFKW+BJ1b1OpQCeNl6iNVj0FjdWsLLpGnyrWc9w
arUAnR+C0EWpYoHFvjpqQU6SQm1y+Jt8
=xp55
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----