[OSGeo-Discuss] [Incubator] Should OSGeo accept "benevolent dictator" projects into OSGeo?
punk.kish at gmail.com
Thu May 5 06:58:58 PDT 2016
Let me ask you: what do you hope to gain by getting an OSGeo mark? And, whatever that is, is that worth all this negotiation?
Personally, I use a product if it is good for me, not because it has a certain blessing on it. There are many non-OSGeo products I use, and there are many OSGeo products I don’t use. If Rasdaman suits my needs, I will use it whether or not it has been blessed by OSGeo.
Since it seems like what you want and what OSGeo is willing to give are at odds, I ask again: what do you hope to gain from OSGeo’s blessing?
> On May 5, 2016, at 6:24 AM, Peter Baumann <p.baumann at jacobs-university.de> wrote:
> Hi Cameron,
> I tried very much to make the situation transparent. Maybe the notion of Principal Investigator helps here (cf Wikipedia - although biased towards medical science):
> A principal investigator (PI) is the holder of an independent grant administered by a university and the lead researcher for the grant project, usually in the sciences, such as a laboratory study or a clinical trial. The phrase is also often used as a synonym for "head of the laboratory" or "research group leader." While the expression is common in the sciences, it is used widely for the person or persons who make final decisions and supervise funding and expenditures on a given research project.
> I am the PI of rasdaman, and that will not change, also not indirectly through wordsmithing as proposed.
> OSGeo is entering new domains with rasdaman, which is: scientific research projects. Like some other communities, these have existed long before OSGeo, and have their own ethics, procedures, and rules. It is unlikely that science will change and give up freedom of research based on its principles well accepted by the whole community. If OSGeo intends to change these in general then maybe starting with rasdaman as an isolated item in a vast universe is not the optimal point.
> OSGeo may find out that its very special (although obviously not unambiguously codified) views constrain it to particular ecosystems. But I am not imposing nor judging. Just trying to explain.
More information about the Discuss