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

Sat Nov 23 00:20:24 PST 2013

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Gert-Jan,
thanks for pointing this out. From all that I know the German language
community is not aware / has not shown interest in investing into this
event. One reason might be that the scope of the conference is global
and location wise is is just barely touching the German speaking region.
So it does not really fit the bill for the FOSSGIS e.V..

As far as I know there has been no coordination of GWF from a global
OSGeo perspective. In the past years we were listed as "strategic
institutional partner" but nobody has picked this up for the next year.
This is not an automatic process. It requires that somebody contacts
Geospatial Media and goes through the formalities, develops a program,
and so on. It can be quite a bit of work.

Best regards,
Arnulf

On 22.11.2013 10:11, geejee at dds.nl wrote:
> 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:
> 
> 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
>>>>
> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/

iEYEARECAAYFAlKQZUcACgkQXmFKW+BJ1b2A7wCfUXN646E1CKWd5OZuzWfQtl5h
4VYAnAnUQQPV8U2kPEpRm55O863tNs70
=DwBY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----