[OSGeo-Conf] Re: 'OSGeo Teach-in

[Frank Warmerdam]

Arnulf Christl wrote:
> I also think that the policy of abstaining from discussion of this issue
> because of a potential conflict of interest does not make sense. Having
> this policy in place is obviously necessary. But if the result is that we
> cannot run the foundation anymore then probably the topic in discussion is
> not compatible with our mission. Maybe we should first talk about this.

Folks,

I would note that the conflict of interest policy was modified to ensure
that those with a declared conflict of interest may still participate in
discussions, but they may not vote for or against any conflict-related
motion.

On this general topic I think it was suggested that any OSGeo branded
training events should be required to provide their training materials
under an appropriate open source license.

Before such a policy into place, it should be considered whether it
applies to FOSS4G.  In the past I do not believe FOSS4G has had such
a requirement.

Generally speaking, my opinion is that we ought to have the following
expectations of an OSGeo branded training event operated by an outside
party (ie. not under the direct administration of OSGeo).

  1) That the training is predominantly related to open source geospatial
     software.  ie. some proprietary software is ok, but the majority of
     the content should be oriented to foss4g.

  2) That the materials, presentation, facilities and instructors be of
     a respectable quality so as not to reflect negatively on OSGeo.

  3) That the activity offers reasonable good "value for money" to paid
     participants so as not to reflect poorly on OSGeo.  (ie. we don't
     want this to be a rip-off using our good name)

  4) That the event is felt to be contributing positively to the OSGeo
     mission.

All the above are very subjective, and so I believe any decision is going
to require a very subjective evaluation by someone.  The decision will also
require a reasonable detailed written proposal from the event organizer.

My suggestion is that we use roughly the same process as is used for a
"letter of support" from OSGeo.  That is, that the event organizer would
have to distribute their plan to osgeo-discuss for feedback and then the
final decision would be made by the board.

Furthermore, if it can organize sufficiently quickly to provide consensus
input, I would be pleased to have the conference committee prepare and
forward a recommendation to the board.  However, I'm hesitant to make
such a recommendation a precondition of a decision being made.

Note, I did not make any particular financial compensation to OSGeo a
decision criteria.  It would basically be a contributing factor (it
helps supports the OSGeo mission), but not required according to any
formula.  Most of the criteria are around whether the event will reflect
well on OSGeo (or at least not poorly), and whether it is supporting our
mission.

I've tried to give this committee time to form it's own opinion, and some
interesting thoughts have come up.  But given that things have settled down
to apparent inactivity on the question, I'm inclined to write up the above
in somewhat more formal language and present it as a motion so we have
something concrete to vote on.

I would welcome feedback in advance of a writeup, or other alternative
motions on a policy.

PS. I will abstain from any vote on a motion as I feel I may suffer
a conflict of interest since I have some hopes of participating in such
an event.

Best regards,
-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam at pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org