[OSGeo-Discuss] We won. It's time for OSGeo 2.0.

[Even Rouault]

Hi Michael,

While you make some good points, I think the need for something like OSGeo is 
still relevant. It has effectively large and diverse initiatives and projects, 
but having a common umbrella behind which to gather makes sense. For software 
projects, being a OSGeo project means that you respect a number of rules 
regarding licensing, governance, etc... OSGeo as a whole has also a voice that 
can have some influence when a message must be said aloud. I'm not sure that 
the impact of scattered projects could be strong enough. I also think to the 
OSGeo-OGC MOU that gives the opportunity to individuals in the community to 
benefit from seats at OGC. I think OSGeo has become a name by itself that 
captures strong values.
I believe there's a perception bias: when something exists and you live in the 
middle of it, you can somehow forget about its existence and necessity. But if 
it was going to disappear, you would realize suddenly how crucial it is. A bit 
like the oxygen you breathe :-)

What we do with it in the future is an open question.

Even

> Thanks Michael for this interesting perspective!
> 
> I have not been following the general discussion and did not take the
> survey, but you triggers me to look for insight and form my own opinion.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Milo
> 
> On Jul 31, 2015 7:49 PM, "Michael Gerlek" <mpg at flaxen.com> wrote:
> > I've stayed out of the pre-survey discussions on charter membership and
> > whatnot, but after taking the survey yesterday, I’m starting to think that
> > 
> >         OSGeo has accomplished what it set out to do some years ago, and
> > 
> > as currently construed OSGeo will no longer serve a useful purpose.
> > 
> > 
> > Back when OSGeo was formed, open source GIS was a new area — islands of
> > people here and there, looking for ways to collaborate on relatively young
> > projects. Recall that hosting source code repositories was a big issue
> > back
> > in the day — but now we have GitHub and the problem no longer exists. Open
> > source, and open source GIS, has reached mainstream acceptance, with lots
> > of projects and lots of communities. To the extent that OSGeo helped get
> > us
> > to the broad level of practice we’re at today, we’ve won.
> > 
> > OSGeo has always been about several different things: code development, of
> > course, but also advocacy, education, live DVDs, and more. Open source GIS
> > is now of a size that it is increasingly hard to keep all these interests
> > aligned and under one big umbrella. The domains of these interests areas
> > are large enough that they should perhaps now be looking to sustain
> > themselves as independent projects — not looking to OSGeo for sponsorship
> > or mentorship.
> > 
> > Indeed, one of the things from the survey that brought me to this point
> > was the question about whether or not some outside party “taking over”
> > OSGeo was a concern or not… and, upon reflection, it turns out that I’m
> > not
> > the least bit concerned: if OSGeo went away, all the various communities
> > of
> > various sorts of open source GIS — MapServer users, LocationTech projects,
> > GeoForAll initiatives — would just keep on doing their own thing.
> > 
> > Where can OSGeo add value? Overseeing the annual international conference?
> > Yes, that’s something that needs to have a home. Beyond that? I’m no
> > longer
> > sure.
> > 
> > 
> > We won. It may now be time for OSGeo 1.0 to take its bows and exit the
> > stage, making room for an OSGeo 2.0 with a new charter aimed at the world
> > for 2016 and beyond.
> > 
> > -mpg
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss mailing list
> > Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

-- 
Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
http://www.spatialys.com