[gdal-dev] Driver maintenance - long-term solution ?

[Paul Harwood]

Just a quick question.

Since the FAANGs were the question, do you know if OSGeo has been vetted
and approved as a Foundation by any of the FAANGs?

As I say, when I was involved on the other side for one, they had more than
a 2 year lead time for that process (I don't know if that was universal or
if they solved that problem). If the answer is yes, then that could be a
way forward - and indeed in at least two of FAANGs that I know the
employees have virtual "pots" of both money and time that they can donate
to approved organisations to "give back" - so appealing to the grass
roots could be a way forward.

You might have to spin it as "promoting the value of Geo software to solve
world problems" or some such - since as I say paying for free software is
questionable legal territory.

On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 at 09:00, Angelos Tzotsos <gcpp.kalxas at gmail.com> wrote:

> Perhaps we could ask some of these organizations to sponsor GDAL through
> https://github.com/sponsors/OSGeo which is a recurring sponsorship ?
>
> Angelos
>
>
> On 1/14/21 12:58 AM, Howard Butler wrote:
>
> On Jan 13, 2021, at 4:28 PM, Nyall Dawson <nyall.dawson at gmail.com> <nyall.dawson at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 at 06:24, David Strip <gdal at stripfamily.net> <gdal at stripfamily.net> wrote:
>
> What is the path forward?  One path Howard suggests is establishing a foundation similar to that behind Qgis. Another alternative, probably far more controversial, is a license change.
>
> I'm pretty clueless regarding licenses -- but this is an interesting
> thought. I wonder if any new drivers added to GDAL could be done with
> a dual-licensing under both GPL + some other license which requires
> ongoing sponsorship of the GDAL project?
>
> License monkey business isn't viable in any way with GDAL. It would just create confusion and erode trust, which we can't get back if broken.
>
> The big organizations running 100,000,000s of CPU hours extracting information from imagery they're reading in COGs with GDAL need to be donating substantial resources into an organization that provides coordination. The last time I did a fund raise with gdalbarn.com <http://gdalbarn.com/> <http://gdalbarn.com/> I was called out for naming some of these organizations and expressing my disappointment they couldn't find a way to participate or simply ignored the request.  Maybe they will step forward this time around.
>
> Whether it is in a new foundation or an existing one like NumFocus, substantial resources need to be dumped in a pot that are earmarked for supporting work that generates value for the project. Chasing new feature work to subsidize project maintenance activities is not sustainable in two directions – burn out for the maintainer and creeping feature-itis for the project.
>
> It's clear what's happened in the past is a combination of luck and graciousness by both Frank and Even.
>
> Howard
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gdal-dev mailing listgdal-dev at lists.osgeo.orghttps://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
>
>
>
> --
> Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
> President
> Open Source Geospatial Foundationhttp://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos
>
> _______________________________________________
> gdal-dev mailing list
> gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/attachments/20210114/f0525442/attachment-0001.html>