[GRASSLIST:9974] Re: [GRASS5] Re: Talking about an umbrella GFOSS foundation

[Michael Barton]

Tyler,

Thanks for the response. As I said previously, I'm in favor of GRASS
participating in this effort. Discussions showed up today about licensing
and support (i.e., what kinds of benefits do projects receive from joining
the foundation). The mission and rationale for the foundation, and for
projects joining the foundation will be important to articulate at the
outset.

Michael  
______________________________
Michael Barton, Professor of Anthropology
School of Human Evolution and Social Change
Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ  85287-2402
USA

voice: 480-965-6262; fax: 480-965-7671
www: http://www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton


> From: Tyler Mitchell <tjm at timberline.ca>
> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 10:45:38 -0800
> To: Michael Barton <michael.barton at asu.edu>
> Cc: grass developers list <grass5 at grass.itc.it>, Multiple recipients of list
> <grasslist at baylor.edu>
> Subject: Re: [GRASS5] Re: Talking about an umbrella GFOSS foundation
> 
> Michael Barton wrote:
>> I joined the list to follow what is going on. Unfortunately, it has quite a
>> bit of normal MapServer development/use issues interspersed with GFOSS
>> foundation discussions.
> 
> Hi Michael,
> Please keep in mind that while the first incarnation of the foundation
> was more focused on MapServer, that is not the case any longer.  The
> "msf-discuss" list is intended specifically for foundation-related
> dialogue and debate - please use it!  Some people accidentally wander
> into it and ask off-topic questions, but I usually point them back to
> the right list :)  I understand that for some people being on a list
> that is run off "mapserverfoundation.org" seems a bit weird, but until
> we rename the foundation there is no way of readily changing the name to
> something more representative of the broader scope.
> 
> I just want to encourage (and welcome!) all users/developers of open
> source geospatial projects to join the debates as much as possible, so
> that when the foundation does get started, it will be as useful for your
> community as possible (regardless of whether your project joins it or not).
> 
>> I'm waiting to see how GRASS fits in. One relevant item that came up is that
>> of licensing standards within the proposed foundation. The short comment
>> suggested that GRASS's GPL license may be a limiting factor, but that it
>> would probably be nigh on impossible to change.
> 
> I don't expect anyone to advocate setting a license standard/requirement
> for foundation projects - at the most we may desire to have one that is
> at least OSI recognised.
> 
>> Something I haven't seen come up yet, but what is probably the most
>> important set of issues at the meeting next week is the governance structure
>> and how support would be allocated.
> 
> What do you mean by 'support'?  The governance structure must be set up
> in a way that makes it desireable for projects to join.  That is the
> common goal that I hear from everyone who is attending.  I'm really glad
> to know Markus is coming.
> 
> Tyler