[OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship

Jody Garnett jody.garnett at gmail.com
Mon Nov 16 23:07:26 PST 2015

That is fine Maxi, I think the point is to be good neighbours.
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 10:43 PM Massimiliano Cannata <
massimiliano.cannata at supsi.ch> wrote:

> Even if I'm willing to accept narrative b, i cannot exclude narrative a
> and thus i'm not willing in expose osgeo to this concrete risk.
> For this reason i believe we should just suspend the "relations" until we
> have clarified this.
> It is too important not to make any mistake driven by th LT pressure
> instead of taking the necessary time to start colaaborating a pice at a
> time and build reciprocal trust among the two entities.
> This is my vision of the facts, i don't say it is bad i dont say it is
> good but trust is something has to be build day by day: i don't give the
> keys of my house to someone i know from a week just becaouse he looks
> gentile ;-)
> Maxi
> Il 17/Nov/2015 03:30, "Jody Garnett" <jody.garnett at gmail.com> ha scritto:
>> Thank you for the two narratives Rob, I find it a much more constructive
>> presentation then the FAQ provided previously.
>> Narrative B matches my own experience, although I have focused on
>> project/developer level interaction (and largely ignored any capacity as a
>> PCO). I think I can make the slightly stronger statement that as a
>> committer representative on the LocationTech steering committee I have
>> always sought a constructive engagement.
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>> On 16 November 2015 at 16:59, Rob Emanuele <rdemanuele at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 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, http://mateusz.loskot.net
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> --
Jody Garnett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20151117/27e4e904/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the Discuss mailing list