[OSGeo-Discuss] Defining a GIO position (or attmepting to . . .)

Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul) bob.basques at ci.stpaul.mn.us
Wed Oct 16 09:00:56 PDT 2013


We're thoroughly entrenched with a OpenSource installation right along side a bunch of commercial products.  It's been very hard for any commercial vendor to even get a leg up in our office for a number of years now because we've got so much stuff already working via OpenSource (and also available to the commercial products.)  However, we still don't have a top level position to over see these things, and there is still splintering of resources that is taking place.


From: discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Norman Vine
Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 10:57 AM
To: osgeo-discuss (discuss at lists.osgeo.org)
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Defining a GIO position (or attmepting to . . .)

On Oct 16, 2013, at 11:34 AM, "Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul)" <bob.basques at ci.stpaul.mn.us<mailto:bob.basques at ci.stpaul.mn.us>> wrote:


Vendor lock-in, or rather preventing it, would be a strong second as far as reasons go, but it's not really applicable to describing a positions work items (I don't think) and seems like it might be closer to a policy issue (in my mind).

Thanks for the feedback.



I would argue that one needs an OpenSource Reference implementation to
vet adherence to any OpenStandard

In fact I would go even further and say that any new OpenStandard proposal
should be accompanied by an OpenSource implementation before acceptance
as such


-----Original Message-----
From: Arnie Shore [mailto:shoreas at gmail.com<http://gmail.com>]
Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 10:04 AM
To: Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul)
Cc: osgeo-discuss (discuss at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:discuss at lists.osgeo.org>)
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Defining a GIO position (or
attmepting to . . .)

Well, adherence to standards is integral to the issue of
interoperability, a critical project success factor in this
increasingly interconnected world.

And, there's no motivation for vendor lock-in, since the revenue
protection motivation (usually!) doesn't exist.  (I can tell you
re all of the verbiage I've excreted in a prior life justifying
sole-source procurements.)

Also, possibly important for the devout among us is that the Good
Lord must love standards;  She made so many of them!


On 10/16/13, Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul)
<bob.basques at ci.stpaul.mn.us<mailto:bob.basques at ci.stpaul.mn.us>> wrote:

Hi all,

I wonder if I could get some feedback on the following
statement, I'm

looking for the other side of the argument (I know it's hard to

yourself there  :c).

"Open Source software enforces standards" ... <snip />

Discuss mailing list
Discuss at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:Discuss at lists.osgeo.org>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20131016/28441d40/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the Discuss mailing list