[Local-chapters] [OSGeo-Conf] Using the FOSS4G brand

Fri Nov 22 01:11:51 PST 2013

The 2014 conference agenda reminds of the fact that the Geospatial  
World Forum (GWF) takes place Geneva this year (5-9 may). Which is  
between the AGIT, FOSS4G-E and FOSSGIS conferences.

In 2012 and 2013 the Dutch local chapter (osgeo.nl) has organized the  
open geo track within the GWF.
(see Paul van Genuchten's report at  
http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2013-May/011727.html)

Is OSGeo in 2014 again invited to become a "strategic institutiona  
partner". Or is the German/Austrian/Swiss (D-A-CH) agenda already to  
crowded to spend time on the GWF 2014

greetz,

Gert-Jan

Arnulf Christl <arnulf.christl at metaspatial.net> schreef:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> The announcement of FOSS4G-E in Bremen came as a surprise to the
> organizing committee of FOSSGIS e.V. We have a regular FOSSGIS
> conference with a few hundred attendees. This year it takes place in
> Berlin just two months earlier. Worse, FOSSGIS organizes an OSGeo day at
> the AGIT conference just ten days prior to the FOSS4G-E. In case that
> FOSS4G comes to Germany we would make sure that there is no local
> FOSSGIS competing for attendees in that same year. Just some coordination.
>
> In the meanwhile we could sort out things and everything is fine now. No
> one dead, just minor injuries. This could have been prevented if we had
> a pool of all planned events and people communicating about what they
> plan *up front*.
>
> This has also been done for some time by trying to maintain lists and
> categories in the OSGeo Wiki [0] but if we don't ask for this then
> nobody will do it. Hence my suggestion to make things a bit more
> transparent and require people to at least announce what they do if they
> tag it with the term FOSS4G. Not a big thing really - I wrongly thought.
> :-) There is so much contention around using the name "FOSS4G" that we
> are apparently missing the point all the time.
>
> Cheers,
> Arnulf
>
> [0] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Category:Events
>
> On 21.11.2013 12:44, Gert-Jan van der Weijden wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> First of all the news from the Lowlands: Last week we had our annual
>> OSgeo.nl day 2013 last week (120 participants).
>>
>> As member of the organizing committee my main concern regarding coordination
>> was a local one: an overcrowded geospatial agenda that week: for instance a
>> linked open data event on exactly the same day (just 5 miles away from our
>> venue in Delft!) but geospatial-related conferences, with overlapping target
>> audiences, were held every single day last week. This caused at least one
>> geo-related event (the day after our conference) to be cancelled due to a
>> lack of participants.
>>
>>
>> Just curious: can anybody explain what exactly the overlap between two (or
>> more) open geospatial events was that Arnulf refers to?
>>
>>
>> Greetings,
>>
>>
>> Gert-Jan
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> Van: local-chapters-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
>> [mailto:local-chapters-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] Namens Seven (aka Arnulf)
>> Verzonden: woensdag 20 november 2013 18:48
>> Aan: Venkatesh Raghavan; Conference Dev; board at lists.osgeo.org;
>> local-chapters
>> Onderwerp: Re: [Local-chapters] [OSGeo-Conf] Using the FOSS4G brand
>>
>> Venka,
>> apparently we are mixing things up here. For clarification I would like to
>> separate the issues touched in related posts. The question is not whether or
>> not to deny or allow anybody to use the FOSS4G brand. Instead my proposal is
>> that OSGeo should help to coordinate events better.
>>
>> Recent events have demonstrated that an uncoordinated proliferation of
>> conference announcements without proper coordination up front leads to
>> confusion and agitation. This is damaging to the community as a whole and
>> easily avoidable by simply prepending an announcement of the intention to
>> hold an event. Then allow the broadest possible community to apprehend what
>> is going on and let them voice their opinion. This is so obvious that so far
>> we have not seen the need to require this but the recent experiences show
>> that it would be helpful to write this down and make it a requirement.
>> * If not OSGeo where else can we do this?
>> * If not through OSGeo how else can we reach that many communities?
>> * If we do not trust OSGeo, then who can we trust with this responsibility?
>>
>> All other considerations regarding revenue coming out of FOSS4G and how to
>> allocate them to Local Chapters, OSGeo global or whoever else may be
>> entitled are different topics. I would like to first find general consensus
>> that there is a need to better coordinate events.
>>
>> If there is considerable resistance to working in a more coordinated way I
>> will happily drop the topic and do something more useful.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Arnulf
>>
>> On 20.11.2013 17:32, Venkatesh Raghavan wrote:
>>> Dear All,
>>
>>> I think this discussion has been done before in discuss [1] and board
>>> lists.
>>> History of FOSS4G is documented at [2] and [3]
>>
>>> FOSS4G refers a philosophy/concept/technology and cannot be branded.
>>> Since it existed before the formation of OSGeo foundation, OSGeo
>>> foundation cannot/need not claim ownership to FOSS4G.
>>
>>> Hoping see more FOSS4G in the bazaar.
>>
>>> Best
>>
>>> Venka
>>
>>> [1]http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2011-November/009759.html
>>> [2]http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G
>>> [3]http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2011-November/009762.html
>>
>>
>>> On 2013/11/20 18:47, Seven (aka Arnulf) wrote:
>>> Folks,
>>> there has been some confusion around the brand FOSS4G, how to organize
>>> local conferences in general, how to link back to OSGeo and so on.
>>
>>> As a result of these ongoings I suggest that OSGeo take more ownership
>>> of the brand FOSS4G. The main reason is to avoid confusion, improve
>>> transparency and make sure that the name FOSS4G continues to stand for
>>> quality events.
>>
>>> Therefore I suggest that anybody who wants to use the name FOSS4G has
>>> to first ask/announce this on this mailing list *before* making it a
>>> public event, sign any contracts, etc.
>>
>>> What is "ask/announce"? Not sure, we may need to better define. From a
>>> do-ocratic [1] point of view anybody should be allowed to go ahead. At
>>> the same time we should strive to avoid conflicts with other events
>>> close by, go easy on volunteer resources, etc. Maybe we can implement
>>> a very simple rule: If nobody complains / raises issues within two
>>> weeks of announcing on the Conference-dev list the organizer can go ahead.
>>
>>> Later we may also want to make sure (make it a rule) that a trusted
>>> OSGeo person is part of the LOC.
>>
>>> What is a "trusted OSGeo person"? Anybody with an official role, be it
>>> board, committee, or chair. If necessary we have to clarify. Again,
>>> I'd like to keep it simple...
>>
>>> Once we have talked about this here and if we agree I would like to
>>> make this a motion to be approved by the Board at one of their next
>> meetings.
>>
>>> A general question is whether the conference committee is prepared to
>>> take on this additional job at all. It appears to be the best place
>>> but if you think this belongs elsewhere please advise.
>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Arnulf
>>
>>> [1] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Do-ocracy
>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Conference_dev mailing list
>>>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>>>
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Conference_dev mailing list
>>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Local-chapters mailing list
>> Local-chapters at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/local-chapters
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Local-chapters mailing list
>> Local-chapters at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/local-chapters
>>
>
> - --
> Arnulf Christl (Director)
> The metaspatial Institute Certification:
> Open Source - Open Data - Open Standards
> http://www.metaspatial.net/en/institute
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlKN9+MACgkQXmFKW+BJ1b11wACfb9XeQyFIbPJWpO73ZAVejLVC
> haQAn0Hke1Jsqz+BO1ylPIZ4pty9qPcg
> =MGm9
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> Local-chapters mailing list
> Local-chapters at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/local-chapters