[OSGeo-Discuss] OGC liaison memberships

[Michael Gerlek]

Adrian showed himself to be a level-headed and rational discoursant during
the recent kerfuffle.

If Adrian is willing, I'd support a motion to put him in charge of, or at
least a member of, some sort of effort to engage with OGC to find out the
Best Way Forward for our two organizations.

I think Arnulf and I are the current gatekeepers of OGC things, such as it
is; I'd of course be happy to continue to help here, and I'm sure Arnulf
would too.

-mpg







-----Original Message-----
From: Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
Date: Thursday, May 30, 2013 1:42 PM
To: Jeff McKenna <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>
Cc: <discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OGC liaison memberships

>OGC voting organisations typically have 1 vote, (2 people who have
>permissions to caste that vote), and each organisation has their own
>process for determining that vote.
>
>I'd suggest that OSGeo should have a committee and set of processes for
>determining the vote. One issue we are going to face is getting swamped
>with the large number of OGC standards that get voted on. I'd be
>interested to hear Adrian's thoughts on this.
>
>On 31/05/2013 6:35 AM, Jeff McKenna wrote:
>> Hi Cameron,
>>
>> I've been also thinking of OGC voting rights for the OSGeo Foundation.
>> I wonder if we should discuss this together during the next Board
>> meeting. (how OSGeo can become a voting member)
>>
>> -jeff
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2013-05-30 5:31 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>> +1 from me too.
>>>
>>> Based on the depth of valuable feedback that OGC received from OSGeo
>>> regarding Geoservices REST API, with Adrian being a significant
>>> contributor, I believe that we have a good argument to ask for voting
>>> rights. (We might not get it, but at least we should ask).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 31/05/2013 4:35 AM, Adrian Custer wrote:
>>>> On 5/30/13 2:54 PM, Frank Warmerdam wrote:
>>>>> Adrian,
>>>>>
>>>>> According to http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OGC_membership we have open
>>>>> slots.
>>>>>    It seems that Arnulf and Michael can authorize it.  There are some
>>>>> fairly
>>>>> restrictive conditions on OGC individual memberships which is what
>>>>> this is.
>>>>>    You should confirm you are going to fit.
>>>>>
>>>>>     http://www.opengeospatial.org/ogc/join/level/individual
>>>> Indeed that is my current status: the 'you can do all the work but
>>>> can't vote' level of membership.
>>>>
>>>>> It isn't clear that these memberships imply you exactly speak for
>>>>>OSGeo
>>>>> though you can certainly give your affiliation as OSGeo.
>>>> Right. I could only 'speak for OSGeo' on any particular topic when,
>>>> after discussion, OSGeo has formulated one, or probably several,
>>>> positions on any issues. In general I would speak as 'one of the horde
>>>> of free software actors'.
>>>>
>>>>> It would be wonderful to use this mechanism to give you standing at
>>>>> OGC as
>>>>> I know you will make good use of it.
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Frank
>>>> ~adrian
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Adrian Custer <acuster at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hey all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I remember it, OSGeo has been granted a number of liaison
>>>>>> memberships
>>>>>> (six?) from the OGC. Are they all being used? If not, what would be
>>>>>>the
>>>>>> process to obtain one?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In past years, I have been reluctant to officially represent OSGeo
>>>>>> and so
>>>>>> have paid for a membership on my own. Nonetheless, I have been
>>>>>> pushing the
>>>>>> OGC on openness, the consideration of free software, and issues
>>>>>>arising
>>>>>> from the 'OSGeo point of view' ever since I started participating at
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> OGC. I have also been acting unofficially as a bridge between the
>>>>>>two
>>>>>> organizations (with the good and bad that comes from that such as,
>>>>>> in the
>>>>>> last few days, being unable to announce the end of the 'GeoServices
>>>>>> REST'
>>>>>> debacle). Now I am considering making this work and my association
>>>>>> between
>>>>>> the two organizations more formal.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Therefore, if you all are willing, and if a membership were
>>>>>> available, I
>>>>>> would like to take this on as a formal role and represent all of you
>>>>>> at the
>>>>>> OGC. It would mean I would show up to meetings and sign my
>>>>>> authorship of
>>>>>> whatever documents with the affiliation 'OSGeo'. In the future, I
>>>>>>also
>>>>>> would plan to lobby the OGC to grant OSGeo a formal vote in the
>>>>>> proceedings
>>>>>> of the technical committee. That will be hard to obtain since we
>>>>>> will not
>>>>>> be pitching in the mega-cash that the OGC needs to sustain their
>>>>>>way of
>>>>>> operating; however, it might be possible someday, especially if we
>>>>>> start
>>>>>> contributing effectively to their work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>>     Adrian Custer
>>>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>-- 
>Cameron Shorter
>Geospatial Solutions Manager
>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
>
>_______________________________________________
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss