[OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch
Sun Sep 14 15:44:40 PDT 2014
As you said the final goal is the same: open source Geospatial software
affirmation. And this is the best thing I can wish to all of us.
Nevertheless what I just have not clear is: what location teach do
differently with respect to osgeo? does it somehow overlap with incubation
or not? What are the distinctive features?
Personally I wonder why some of the most eminent person of osgeo (like you)
decided to work into location teach? Don't misunderstood me, I'm not
judging nor criticizing, I'd just like to understand opportunities or
aspect or services not found in osgeo and that experts and leaders found
Sorry in advance for my eventual ignorance, but I think this would help
people better understand the discussion and the future of osgeo.
Il 14-set-2014 17:05 "Daniel Morissette" <dmorissette at mapgears.com> ha
> FWIW I'm happy to hear that there was such a face to face discussion. I
> believe that open communication on the issues will be the best way to
> address the fears and find ways to move forward in the best interest of the
> overall worldwide community of people, businesses, institutions, etc who
> have a common interest in seeing free and open source geospatial software
> Keep in mind that we all come to this model of software development for
> different reasons (business, academic, philosophical, hobby, etc.), but in
> the end we're all working towards a similar objective, so there is no fear
> to be had, just different means of reaching a common objective, and since
> the result of everybody's actions is better free/open source software,
> everybody will benefit in the end.
> Not sure if I was able to relay my thoughts properly... maybe I need a bit
> more sleep.
> Cheers all
> On 14-09-14 10:25 AM, Jachym Cepicky wrote:
>> as long as I understand it: "some members of the community" are scared
>> of LocationTech "taking over" whatever (FOSS4G conference, OSGeo
>> projects and community). This can be based on real action, taken on
>> either site, unofficial statement, misunderstandings or personal
>> Yesterday, we had short (about 2hours) face 2 face discussion with
>> Andrew here in PDX (me, Vasile, Jeff and Gerald) and I personally
>> believe, that it is not in interest of LocationTech to "crush" OSGeo
>> or FOSS4G conference. It was clearly stated, that LocationTech would
>> like to contribute to FOSS4G and make it to better conference,
>> regarding (again) "some remarks" of "some members of the community"
>> (including myself), that the way, FOSS4G is organised, does not
>> necessary meet some of the community aspects, we would like to stress.
>> I would like to note, that the discussion was very open on both sides,
>> still calm and productive.
>> "To contribute" of course means "to work" and LocationTech is anything
>> but volunteer driven organisation. It has been stated, that FOSS4G-NA
>> next year will be organised primarily by LocationTech, but OSGeo willl
>> be represented clearly and (so to say) loudly.
>> This could be one of the firsts steps towards closer cooperation
>> between LocationTech and OSGeo.
>> Everybody is aware, that on some points, LocationTech is not that
>> good, as OSGeo currently is. OSGeo is certainly failing in other
>> things. Looking for ways, how to strengthen common strengths and
>> weaken our weaknesses should have "non-zero-sum" effect.
>> We, as OSGeo shall later evaluate, whether the price for helping us
>> LocationTech with conferences (regardless if on regional or global
>> level), was too hight or quite ok. In case of disagreement, we shall
>> try to find solution for the next time.
>> In the worst case, we find out, that cooperation is not possible and
>> everybody can go it's way than.
>> I hope, you get my point(s) and that I did not misinterpreted
>> anything, what was said.
>> Thank you
> Daniel Morissette
> T: +1 418-696-5056 #201
> Provider of Professional MapServer Support since 2000
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Discuss