[OSGeo-Conf] Re: Selecting a perpetual FOSS4G PCO?

[Cameron Shorter]

Conference committee,
Jeff, Arnulf and myself have been approached by an international 
consortium of Professional Conference Organisors (PCOs), offering to 
take over the hosting of FOSS4G around the world for us.

I've <snipped their original email, and my response as I don't have 
permission to forward on>.

I believe that we have reached the point with FOSS4G that it would make 
sense to have a paid staff role, or a partner organisation, dedicated to 
managing the hosting of FOSS4G, this providing continuity of knowledge 
about FOSS4G from city to city.
This person/org could also be tasked with supporting the setting up of 
local "mini-FOSS4G" conferences, like the German InterGEO event.

This would help reduce the very high learning curve that each LOC faces 
when running FOSS4G, and will allow us to set up websites and 
infrastructure which is passed on.

I'm open to a number of options regarding the details, but what I think 
might work would be:

Role: FOSS4G organisor, answerable to LOC.
Local Organising Committee, answerable to OSGeo board, or Tyler.
Local PCO: Answerable to LOC. Local PCO might be part of an 
international group of PCOs.

Key requirement for all PCOs: Apart from privacy issues, all 
documentation, processes, budgets, etc are made free via an Open 
License. Where financially practical, preference given to Open Source 
software systems.


On 11/08/11 18:54, Seven (aka Arnulf) wrote:  (forwarded with Arnulf's 
permission)
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi,
> so both Jeff an me are "Doctor" now, cool.
>
> Fun aside, what are we going to do with these folks? This is the last
> PCO in a row of a dozen who contacted me over the past half year. I
> explained our current process to all of them but most insist that having
> a dedicated and yearly returning conf organizer would bring so many
> advantages.
>
> There are three contenders who I know have direct stakes in the
> geospatial world, this is GIS Development, GITA and Hinte (Intergeo).
> All three also have some experience with Open Source which to me is most
> important.
>
>
> There are other aspects to consider. One is that a larger, global and
> more mainstream org will effectively also have a new team on site every
> time we come to a different location. This probably does not help us a
> lot because what we seek is continuity.
>
> So what do you think, should we simply prepare a standard
> we-wont-commit-to-anyone-in-particular letter to send to all of them? Or
> are we interested in tying up closer with GITA, GIS-Development or Hinte
> - - or shall we leave this to the local chaps (who are already doing this
> anyway)?
>
> We might also want to move this to the conf list.
>
> and last but not least: Jeff, what are your thoughts about a handbook
> outlining the skeleton of the conf in written form as an open guideline
> for all coming teams. I know you did not like the idea too much to start
> with but maybe you have a different opinion now.
>
> Cheers,
> Arnulf.
>

-- 
Cameron Shorter
Geospatial Director
Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050
Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254

Think Globally, Fix Locally
Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source
http://www.lisasoft.com