[OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] OSGeo and LocationTech

[Andrew Ross]

Hi Cameron, Michael, All

Yes that makes good sense, will likely yield tangible benefits. I'm in.

I note that Jody Garnett is chair of the incubation Committee and also 
on the Project Management Committee (PMC) @ LocationTech. (added to /cc)

Andrew

On 09/10/2012 04:26 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> Andrew,
> I suggest that the next steps would be to do a gap analysis between 
> OSGeo incubation processes and LT incubation processes.
> This gap analysis will likely lead to:
>
> * Merging of both OSGeo and LT processes to pick up the best points of 
> each.
> * Identification of the differences, followed by a process describing 
> the migration path from one to the other.
>
> Andrew, is this something you are interested to pursue, possibly in 
> conjunction with the incubation committee?
>
> On 11/09/2012 12:51 AM, Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
>> Cameron:
>>
>> There's no reason a project can't play in both LT and OSGeo spheres, 
>> and indeed proposed a motion to that effect some months ago now.
>>
>> However, it proved very controversial among some members of our 
>> community and I didn't feel it worth fighting at the time. Perhaps 
>> more pragmatic heads will prevail as LT gets further along.
>>
>> -mpg
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 10, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Andrew Ross <andrew.ross at eclipse.org> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 09/08/2012 04:38 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>>> Andrew, I'm moving this conversation over to OSGeo Discuss list so 
>>>> that it has the opportunity for wider discussion.
>>> Thank you Cameron. And hello everyone.
>>>> Extracting from a conversation on the board email list ...
>>>>
>>>> On 09/09/12 00:25, Andrew Ross wrote:
>>>>> If there is a close relationship between OSGeo & LocationTech, say 
>>>>> where there is a natural progression of projects into OSGeo and 
>>>>> then to LocationTech as they mature and look for corporate 
>>>>> adoption & contributions, the Steering Committee may see good 
>>>>> value in financial support. We are creating a program modelled 
>>>>> after Friends of Eclipse which enables individual sponsorship for 
>>>>> a modest amount. This program is designed to raise funds 
>>>>> explicitly for the community. A close relationship with OSGeo 
>>>>> helping to direct those funds might make a lot of sense.
>>>>>
>>>>> These are things going on at LocationTech in any case. Maybe they 
>>>>> make sense to get involved with or perhaps not. I'm glad to 
>>>>> discuss if there's potential.
>>>> Andrew, I'd like to suggest extending your thought to suggest that 
>>>> projects can be members of "OSGeo" AND "LocationTech" rather than 
>>>> OSGeo OR LocationTech. Any reason why that wouldn't work?
>>>>
>>> Yes, at this point it looks like this can work fine.
>>>
>>> A project needs to comply with governance/requirements be it those 
>>> of OSGeo or LocationTech. There is much overlap in this regard. In 
>>> terms of difference, LocationTech appears to have more rigour in 
>>> terms of code provenance, digging through prerequisites to detect 
>>> potentially undesirable licensing issues, trademark search, and 
>>> such. The bill of good health that results is seen as desirable by 
>>> many companies when considering reuse & investment in the project.
>>>
>>> Andrew