[Board] OGC update

Tom Kralidis tomkralidis at gmail.com
Sat Aug 24 07:40:17 PDT 2019


Sorry, adding Athina to this thread.  Per below.

On Sat, Aug 24, 2019 at 8:53 AM Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Scott: we are planning to discuss OGC relationship tomorrow
> (Sunday).  Are you in Bucharest?
> If not, do you have any availability tomorrow to dial in (on Bucharest time)?
>
> Once we have a better idea of your availability we'll setup a web conf.
>
> ..Tom
>
> On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 12:04 AM Scott Simmons <ssimmons at ogc.org> wrote:
> >
> > Jody,
> >
> > I will see if we can support on Sunday either in person or remotely. Will you have a web conference setup for the meeting?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Scott
> >
> > On Aug 6, 2019, at 10:31 AM, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > If anyone is willing to speak on behalf of OGC we can add this topic/discuss to the F2F meeting agenda: https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2019-08-24
> >
> > Indeed we can work on this even without an OGC representative, I will add the topic for Sunday. Still the invitation is open if the OGC wishes to attend or set up a meeting later during the week.
> > --
> > Jody Garnett
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 at 09:14, Tom Kralidis <tomkralidis at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>  Bruce: thanks for the info. In principle I agree and thanks for your leadership and ideas. Suggest we can dive deeper around foss4g time in Bucharest?
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >> On Aug 6, 2019, at 06:11, Bruce Bannerman <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Jody,
> >>
> >> (@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.
> >>
> >>
> >> Kind regards,
> >>
> >> Bruce
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 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.
> >>
> >> ..Tom
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >> On Mar 25, 2019, at 18:41, Bruce Bannerman <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.
> >>
> >> Bruce
> >>
> >> On 26 Mar 2019, at 08:38, Bob Basques <bbasques at sharedgeo.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> All,
> >>
> >> Wouldn't/couldn't this amount to just inviting the CITE team?  Or is it more than that?
> >>
> >> bobb
> >>
> >> On Mon, Mar 25, 2019, 4:52 PM Jody Garnett <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> 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,
> >>>>
> >>>> Bruce
> >>>>
> >>>> On 26 Mar 2019, at 04:50, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I have updated the OGC partnership page:
> >>>>
> >>>> - 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> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Bruce and Jeff: at our OSGeo Board meeting today [1] 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?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ..Tom
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2019-03-25
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Board mailing list
> >>>>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> >>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Board mailing list
> >>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> >>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Board mailing list
> >> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
> >>
> >>
> >


More information about the Board mailing list