[OSGeo-Discuss] Polling charter members

[Ravi Kumar]

This ' LocationTech and OSGeo collaboration ', appears to be some thing that the OSGeo Charter should involve and motivate opinion etc. Those at the helm may pl post a summary of the, 'storey so far'. 



On Thursday, September 18, 2014 2:23 AM, Jachym Cepicky <jachym.cepicky at gmail.com> wrote:
 


Just noting,

discussion about relationship between LocationTech and OSGeo is here
since 2012
 (IIRC). That many people did not pain attention to it
(actually including myself up to certain time), is not fault of OSGeo
.. or LocationTech.

It's just actually boring topic. We are community of (mostly)
developers and users of FOSS4G (not conference, but software in this
case). This sounds like politics .. who would pay attention? So, now
we are here, things are happening, we can finally talk to whole
community, because of this IMHO *is* important topic - two big
organisations are trying to find a way, how to cooperate in the future
for better free and open source software for geospatial! This is good.
If for nothing else, then for clarifying OSGeo's position.

Jachym

2014-09-17 22:42 GMT+02:00 P Kishor <punk.kish at gmail.com>:
> My guess is, just as I do, most Charter Members find this entire thread very
>
 alien. For us who don't go to FOSS4G, OSGeo means something completely
> different (here is where I disagree with an earlier email--I think it was Jo
> Cook--that folks know OSGeo products but not OSGeo). To suddenly hear of all
> this chatter about FOSS4G being used as a football between OSGeo and
> LocationTech (an org I heard about for the first time also in this thread)
> is like waking up at night to find a bunch of strangers chatting in your
> living room.
>
> Definitely, involving Charter Members would be a very sound and nice thing
> to do.
>
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Steven Feldman <shfeldman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Before we get to the stage of polling charter members and local chapters,
>> it would be helpful if more of the charter membership and local
 chapters
>> chipped in with their opinions. Many seem to have been very quiet, i am sure
>> they must have a view
>> ______
>> Steven
>>
>>
>> On 17 Sep 2014, at 20:00, conference-europe-request at lists.osgeo.org wrote:
>>
>> From: Massimiliano Cannata <massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch>
>> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
>> Date: 17 September 2014 19:22:24 BST
>> To: P Kishor <punk.kish at gmail.com>
>> Cc: OSGeo Discussions <discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
>>
>>
>> Puneet,
>> I agree with you, this is an "hot" decision that cannot be taken by a
>> small group of people without at least have heard about what the OSGeo
>> community think about.
>>
>> In this tread I have learnt a lot on LocationTech and on motivation that
>> pushed some OSGeo members to embrace also LocationTech. I can really feel
>> the desire to help and foster geospatial open source software from those
>> guys.
>>
>> BTW, I also believe that FOSS4G is the OSGeo event.
>>
>> For this reason I believe that if OSGeo want to change things and share it
>> with LocationTech (not just let them organize it in the name of), we need a
>> deep OSGeo internal discussion at all level: Local Chapters, Charter
>> members,
 Committees and finally the Board which has the responsibility to
>> vote on this.
>>
>> So, my proposal is:
>> 1) Have a formal proposal from LocationTech which explain terms of
>> collaboration, commitments and guarantees
>> 2) Publish publicly this proposal for a period (let's say 2 week) for
>> people to look into this proposal
>> 3) Call for a vote from charter members
>> 4) Call for a letter of position letter from each committee and local
>> Chapters
>> 5) Publish publicly the results
>> 6) Discuss it on the next board meeting and finally have a vote and a
>> letter of motivation from the Board
>>
>>
>> BTW, the FOSS4G-EUROPE website (http://foss4g-e.org/) states clearly at
>> the home page: "OSGeo's European Conference on Free and Open Source
 Software
>> for Geospatial".
>>
>>
>> I hope this doesn't hurt anyone, and brings positive point of discussion.
>>
>> It is just my personal thought as a new board member, and sorry if I've
>> lost some best practice currently in place.
>>
>> Maxi
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
>
> --
> Puneet Kishor
> Manager, Science and Data Policy
> Creative Commons
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss



-- 
Jachym Cepicky
e-mail: jachym.cepicky gmail com
URL: http://les-ejk.cz
GPG: http://les-ejk.cz/pgp/JachymCepicky.pgp

Give your code freedom with PyWPS - http://pywps.wald.intevation.org
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss



Ravi Kumar
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140918/e3d0ddf0/attachment-0002.html>