[OSGeo-Discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

[Michael Smith]

I believe that narrative B best fits what I know about LocationTech and
their interactions with OSGeo.

Note that this is my personal opinion.

----
Michael Smith
OSGeo Foundation Treasurer
treasurer at osgeo.org


From:  Discuss <discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org> on behalf of Rob Emanuele
<rdemanuele at gmail.com>
Date:  Monday, November 16, 2015 at 7:59 PM
To:  Mateusz Loskot <mateusz at loskot.net>
Cc:  OSGeo Discussions <discuss at lists.osgeo.org>
Subject:  [EXTERNAL] Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship
Resent-From:  Michael Smith <michael.smith at usace.army.mil>

> I think there's two narratives that are at conflict in this entire thread. I'm
> going to try to try to spell them out as I see them:
> 
> A. LocationTech is a newer-than-OSGeo organization that is trying to make a
> name for itself, capture market share, promote it's brand, in general act in a
> way that makes itself grow. The intention behind LocationTech's actions in
> offering services as a professional conference organizer is mostly for it's
> own gain; LocationTech wants to smoothly slide into becoming a part of OSGeo's
> annual conference for the profit and promotion of itself, to the potential
> loss of OSGeo. For that reason, it is best for the OSGeo community to protect
> itself from LocationTech, keep measured distance between the organizations,
> not allow it to become part of the FOSS4G international event, or at least to
> be suspicious of it's stated good intentions in offering itself to be PCO. The
> real story is that LocationTech's intentions are primarily about the profits
> and higher visibility it will gain from being part of FOSS4G, and the help it
> is offering plays a secondary role.
> 
> B. LocationTech is an organization that was created out of intentions to help
> parts of the community that were perhaps not best served by OSGeo at the time.
> It has it's own governance and ways of doing things, which include being
> backed by small and large companies looking to contribute financial support to
> the open source community, which allows for things like paid staff. The model
> is different than OSGeo, the structure is different than OSGeo, and the aims
> are similar but have differences. One differences is that it's parent
> organization is the Eclipse Foundation, who have professional conference
> organizers on staff and a lot of experience running successful conferences.
> Seeing this is a valuable thing that the open source geospatial community can
> take advantage of, LocationTech offers it's services as a professional
> conference organizer to the FOSS4G NA regional conferences, and now has
> offered it's services to the international conference in 2017. While certainly
> not eschewing the increase in visibility in the community that being part of
> the conferences would afford LocationTech, that plays a secondary role to the
> earnest desire to help the open source geospatial community.
> 
> Have I captured these narratives correctly or incorrectly? They are based on
> impressions and implicit opinions that I've tried to understand from these
> conversations. I think perhaps explicitly stating them would be useful, so if
> I have failed to do so correctly please correct me.
> 
> I obviously have a preference for believing that narrative B best fits the
> reality of the situation. Self promotion surely must play some role in
> LocationTech's actions, but is it naive to think that the intentions of
> LocationTech are for the community first and itself second? Perhaps. I don't
> think so though. The alternative is certainly not how I operate when I
> participate in LocationTech.
> 
> I prefer the narrative of openness and trust vs the narrative of mistrust and
> suspicion that sounds like bad politics. I hope that this community that I
> choose to participate in is not such a political mess that breeds that sort of
> selfish market share power plays, and instead it is a community of people and
> organizations that take actions based on how they can contribute to an overall
> good.
> 
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Mateusz Loskot <mateusz at loskot.net> wrote:
>> On 16 November 2015 at 23:11, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > If I was to sum up the difference in outlook between the two organizations
>>> > today it would more be along the lines of LocationTech being "developer
>>> > focused" and OSGeo being "user focused'. I think that is more a reflection
>>> > of where the projects involved are in their incubation process that any
>>> > strategic difference.
>> 
>> Jody,
>> 
>> I have to admit, to me as OSGeo member as developer (+SAC supporter),
>> this whole thread has not clarified almost nothing.
>> 
>> As much as I appreciate (and carefully read through) all your inputs,
>> that summary leaves me with even more questions.
>> 
>> And, BTW, I agree with you about the FAQ, it also reads naive and silly
>> (e.g. comparing Apache vs Mozilla, two different scopes, to
>> LocationTech vs OSGeo,
>> two with clear overlap).
>> 
>> Putting all the emotional cream whipped so far aside and objectively,
>> clearly, that it is all about potential, capacity and market share.
>> 
>> OSGeo has proved its potential, it is capable to paddle its own canoe
>> for a decade or more,
>> via large self-organized community and successful projects.
>> 
>> LocationTech is a fairly new player with huge & rich organization behind,
>> that has to prove it's capable to secure market share, and its position.
>> Otherwise, the parent organization will simply shut it down as any
>> failed project.
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> --
>> Mateusz  Loskot, BlockedBlockedhttp://mateusz.loskot.netBlocked
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20151116/e7819f5a/attachment.html>