[Board] Invitation to OSGeo to participate in LocationTech

Wed Oct 31 12:54:22 PDT 2012

Hi all,

I had a good chat with Andrew Ross yesterday about our participation in
LocationTech (will send more nots on that in due course). I am working
through the paperwork for us to formally become an Associate Member of the
Eclipse Foundation to participate in the LocationTech working group.

We need to sign the Eclipse Foundation Membership Agreement which I've
attached. We would be associate members with no fees. Please let me know if
you have any concerns with anything in the agreement.

Is it okay for me to sign and return this as our representative, or should
it be signed by Daniel or Frank or Michael on behalf of OSGeo?

Cheers,
    Peter.

On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Cameron Shorter
<cameron.shorter at gmail.com>wrote:

>  Board members,
> Does anyone else have thoughts about participation with LocationTech? If
> so, I suggest putting together in an email prior to the meeting.
>
> My suggestion is:
> * OSGeo should accept this invitation to join LocationTech. I think that
> OSGeo/LocationTech working together will be much stronger than competing
> against each other, and that this offer is a good first step toward
> building a positive relationship.
>
> * Preferably a board member should take the LocationTech position, as a
> board position is a position of authority that has been voted on by the
> community. (Delegation of responsibility by the board is fraught with
> potential accusations of why one person was selected over another).
>
> * I'd prefer not to be the OSGeo member, as my timezone is not conducive
> for attending EU/US meeting times. However, I would like to monitor a low
> traffic email list.
>
>
>
>
> On 04/10/12 10:36, Andrew Ross wrote:
>
> Cameron,
>
> I'll do my best to answer in-line.
>
> On 10/03/2012 06:50 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>
> Andrew,
> I'm wanting to get down to the details of what is and is not expected and
> acceptable, because I'm sure we will need to answer community questions
> about this in the future. (My questions are deliberately baiting in order
> to try to flush out what might be obvious to yourself).
>
> Q1: What types of working groups are you expecting LocationTech to host
> which people will wish to be involved in? Why would such groups be set up
> to be exclusive, rather than "everyone's welcome" which is current OSGeo
> default?
>
> This model is very common and one often used for standards bodies,
> industry associations, and the like. If you look at OGC for example it'll
> look eerily familiar.
>
> You use the term everyone's welcome as though implying that everyone is
> not welcome to the working groups at LocationTech. They are indeed very
> welcome. There are fees for some services. To illustrate my point, FOSS4G
> charges registration. Why can't FOSS4G be "everyone's welcome"? Same
> answer... the funds cover costs and support delivering benefits to the
> ecosystem.
>
> Comparing apples with apples, the open source projects at LocationTech are
> "everyone's welcome" just as they are at OSGeo.
>
> As I meet new people getting involved at LocationTech I try very hard to
> understand their needs and wants as a prelude to helping them achieve them.
> One thing I have learned is they are diverse. Some common themes include
> advancing the state of the art, tight integration with other enterprise IT
> systems, creating new reference implementations of standards, and more. For
> this reason it's not really practical for me to encapsulate so much
> information succinctly here.
>
>  Q2: If a person wants to be involved in a LocationTech working group,
> what process should they follow? Should they lobby the OSGeo board asking
> to be assigned as an official OSGeo delegate?
> Should OSGeo board allow anyone who asks to be given delegate status?
> If not, what are the criteria for being allocated delegate status? More
> importantly, under what circumstances does the board reject the request?
> Is there a limit to the number of OSGeo representatives LocationTech will
> accept?
>
>
> OSGeo would appoint a single delegate.  Given the potential the
> relationship with LocationTech represents, it might make sense for it to be
> a board member. To be honest, it isn't my place to say how this person
> should be identified.
>
>  Q3: What value does LocationTech hope to gain by including OSGeo as a
> member organisation?
>
>
> To foster the important idea that it really is one ecosystem. To promote
> collaboration. To invite valuable input to shape the direction of the
> working group & help shape the industry. etc. etc.
>
>  Q4: What value does OSGeo gain?
>
>
> Another useful forum to relate to companies including big ones without
> giving up autonomy. Another way to find and approach potential sponsors.
>
>
> Q5: What level of effort is required, by whom, within OSGeo? Eg: A
> requirement for a high level of involvement from the OSGeo board might not
> be sustainable.
>
>
> The work isn't too onerous I don't think. Participate on a monthly
> conference call. Participate on the mailing list. Look for opportunities of
> interest to OSGeo. To be honest there are multiple people that might make
> excellent candidates to represent OSGeo already doing this informally. The
> representative can be changed at any time.
>
>
> On 4/10/2012 7:01 AM, Andrew Ross wrote:
>
> Hi Cameron,
>
> In practice, a formal representative from OSGeo would participate in the
> working group sessions and discussions.
>
> The links I provided provide a short summary of membership rights and
> privileges. The Eclipse Foundation bylaws<http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/Eclipse%20BYLAWS%202011_08_15%20Final.pdf>(PDF) and LocationTech
> charter<http://www.eclipse.org/org/industry-workgroups/locationtech_charter.php>are the canonical pages with much detail.
>
> Any individual designated by OSGeo can be the representative. The
> representative can be changed as needed. What you wrote sounds like any
> number of people and that's not right.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> Andrew
>
> On 10/03/2012 04:17 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>
> Andrew,
> Can you please expand on what such membership would mean in practice. Is
> there a web page explaining what such membership entails?
>
> Does this membership provide an avenue for any individual to participate
> in Locationtech by noting they are part of OSGeo (as OSGeo accepts anyone
> offering to help OSGeo)?
>
> On 04/10/12 04:40, Andrew Ross wrote:
>
> Thank you Frank.
>
> That's right regarding formal representation for OSGeo at LocationTech.
>
> And confirmed re: OSGeo wouldn't be a Steering Committee member for $0.
>
> For what it's worth, OSGeo could be a Steering Committee member for
> $15K/year at any point.
>
> Andrew
>
> On 10/03/2012 02:13 PM, Frank Warmerdam wrote:
>
> Andrew,
>
> Thanks - I have added this to our agenda for the next board meeting at:
>
>    http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2012-10-11
>
> I gather to make this useful we would want to have one or more
> OSGeo representatives to join various LocationTech mailing lists
> to participate in discussions and act as a liason?  I gather we would
> be general members of the locationtech working group, but not
> voting members of the steering committee, right?
>
> Best regards,
> Frank
>
> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Andrew Ross <andrew.ross at eclipse.org><andrew.ross at eclipse.org>wrote:
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> On behalf of the LocationTech Steering Committee, I would like to formally
> invite OSGeo to participate in LocationTech. LocationTech's Steering
> Committee unanimously agreed to invite OSGeo to participate without
> membership dues. To do so, OSGeo would sign up as an Associate member of
> the
> Eclipse Foundation ($0 for OSGeo) and Participating member of LocationTech
> (also $0 due to the invitation).
>
> OSGeo's involvement in this working group:
>
> helps influence the working group's direction
> provides a useful forum for OSGeo to engage companies
> maintains close ties to help identify opportunities of mutual benefit &
> collaboration
>
> Best regards,
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Cameron Shorter
> Geospatial Solutions Manager
> Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050
> Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254
>
> Think Globally, Fix Locally
> Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Sourcehttp://www.lisasoft.com
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing listBoard at lists.osgeo.orghttp://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>
>
>
> --
> Cameron Shorter
> Geospatial Solutions Manager
> Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050
> Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254
>
> Think Globally, Fix Locally
> Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Sourcehttp://www.lisasoft.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/attachments/20121031/9646dbbd/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Eclipse MEMBERSHIP AGMT 2010_01_05 Final.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 223817 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/attachments/20121031/9646dbbd/attachment.pdf>