[Board] OGC update
bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com
Mon Aug 5 20:11:25 PDT 2019
(@Scott, I’d also appreciate your feedback on the issue and proposal below.)
In addition to my 25 March response to your request to an update on the OSGeo / OGC relationship:
I’ve been having a bit more of a think about this relationship.
In my opinion our relationship with OGC is stagnant with little happening in a coordinated manner. Our current relationship is not in the best interests of either OSGeo, or the OGC.
We have six OSGeo members filling Osgeo Individual OGC Membership roles, with the occasional report back to the Standards list. I'm starting to be a bit more proactive in insisting on these reports at membership renewal time.
We also have a few pockets of activity where OSGeo Members are working closely within OGC committees and teams to contribute to standards work. I see that a good example of this is Tom Kraldis’ efforts. I’ll let Tom speak to this work.
I think that we need to go back and reboot the OSGeo/OGC relationship, commencing with some requirements analysis via the OSGeo Standards list. We need to geet a much better understanding of what our community and OGC would like from our relationship.
I’d like to see us initiate a much more focussed relationship with OGC that will allow us (as an OSGeo Community) more effectively help drive OGC Standards change that appears to be occurring post the OGC/W3C work on Spatial Data on the Web. There is considerable potential for open source solutions to lead the way for many standards.
The results of the requirements analysis **may** require us to renegotiate our OSGeo/OGC MOU to:
- include OGC Technical Committee Membership for OSGeo to help us be more effective in our standards collaboration;
- find a mechanism for open source solutions to obtain and maintain OGC Certification without our communities having to struggle to find scarce funds to do so; and
- address other issues that may become apparent after the requirements analysis process, e.g. finding a more effective solution for a CITE Community.
I’m prepared to initiate and to lead this OSGeo/OGC reboot effort.
However I would like an indication from the OSGeo Board that:
- you are happy for this effort to proceed and will launch the process when we’re ready to start;
- you are happy to look at the renegotiation of the OSGeo/OGC MOU if required;
- you are happy for me to lead the effort; and
- for you to define any specific parameters that you’d like the reboot effort to work within.
Once we have this sorted out, I’ll start work on the preparation.
> On 26 Mar 2019, at 10:02, Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Bruce. I will reach out to CITE.
> Having said this, OGC is setting up hackathons later this year with focus on the evolving standards (read OpenAPI) so we can put efforts toward OSGeo participation. More to come.
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 25, 2019, at 18:41, Bruce Bannerman <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com <mailto:bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> From memory, OGC tried running CITE through the OSGeo Incubation process several years ago.
>> I suspect that there were unrealistic expectations that this would result in people taking responsibility for the software project on behalf of OGC.
>> They then took CITE to another open source incubator.
>> By all means, invite the CITE team to participate. It will be beneficial for all.
>> On 26 Mar 2019, at 08:38, Bob Basques <bbasques at sharedgeo.org <mailto:bbasques at sharedgeo.org>> wrote:
>>> Wouldn't/couldn't this amount to just inviting the CITE team? Or is it more than that?
>>> On Mon, Mar 25, 2019, 4:52 PM Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com <mailto:jody.garnett at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> I am sure it can, perhaps we can chat in next months OSGeo meeting?
>>> There is an upcoming OSGeo code sprint in May and it would be nice if CITE Team engine could attend.
>>> Enjoy the outback!
>>> Jody Garnett
>>> On Mon, 25 Mar 2019 at 14:46, Bruce Bannerman <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com <mailto:bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> Hi Tom, Jody,
>>> I’m currently travelling in Outback Australia with very limited Internet access.
>>> Can this wait for two weeks, until I’m back.
>>> The bottom line is that we can do a lot to improve our OGC/OSGeo relationship. However this will take a dedicated effort at community building. I’ve just started this process.
>>> Kind regards,
>>> On 26 Mar 2019, at 04:50, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com <mailto:jody.garnett at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> I have updated the OGC partnership page <https://www.osgeo.org/partners/ogc/>:
>>>> - Bruce was is your OSGeo ID?
>>>> - Vicky I could not figure out how to add more than one OSGeo contact point, is this something we can change?
>>>> Jody Garnett
>>>> On Mon, 25 Mar 2019 at 10:05, Tom Kralidis <tom.kralidis at gmail.com <mailto:tom.kralidis at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> Hi Bruce and Jeff: at our OSGeo Board meeting today  our
>>>> partnership with OGC came
>>>> up in a few areas:
>>>> - invite CITE project to OSGeo Code Sprint
>>>> - provide an overall update on OSGeo/OGC to the Board
>>>> Is it possible for one or both of you to provide an update to the Board?
>>>>  https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2019-03-25 <https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2019-03-25>
>>>> Board mailing list
>>>> Board at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Board at lists.osgeo.org>
>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>_______________________________________________
>>> Board mailing list
>>> Board at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Board at lists.osgeo.org>
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>_______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Board at lists.osgeo.org>
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board <https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Board