[Local-chapters] [OSGeo-Conf] OS conference platform

[michael terner]

I am all for having a standard set of tools that are available to FOSS4G
teams whether the conferences are at the Global, National or Regional
levels.

That said, I firmly agree with Maria's statement that "we shouldn't force
any decision over the LOCs." For example, in the Boston Conference, the
Registration system and the Abstract submission/scoring system was *provided
by *our Professional Conference Organizer at a very reasonable cost and
part of the complete "package" they offered us. This saved our volunteers
time and focus and it worked very well (e.g., our PCO also acted as our
"bank" and the registration system they used easily integrated with their
banking).

I would also observe that "open source options" aren't necessarily *always*
the lowest cost, if you look at them through the lens of "total cost of
ownership." For example, the Bucharest team used the open source Pretalx
system for Abstract submittal/scoring, and Volker Mische provided
non-trivial (and amazing) assistance in making Pretalx work for the Program
Committee (which I participated in). I also believe that Bucharest actually
funded some needed enhancements to Pretalx. Thus, before declaring that
Attendify needs to be "gotten rid of" partly because it "costs a lot of
money every year (compared with open source options)." Is there really an
open source option that is as good and easy to administer as Attendify? The
mobile app is mission critical and Attendify has now proven itself as
effective across 3 successive FOSS4G's? Also, Attendify - at least for
Boston - was extremely cost effective and we spent only around $1,000 (I
don't know what the current cost for Bucharest was?). My point is that
finding a volunteer to figure out and successfully deploy (and extend?) an
open source solution could easily lead to a total cost of ownership that is
higher for using an open source solution (if you value the time that
volunteers would need to invest in making it work). Of course, the GDPR
issue is different and very important and needs to be resolved. I would
hope that Attendify is working on it. As per above, this should be an LOC
choice and if there is a good open source solution, and a team ready to
deploy it, then more power to that team.

Thanks again to the whole Bucharest team for another amazing and useful
FOSS4G experience in 2019!!!

MT




On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 12:15 PM María Arias de Reyna <delawen at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Good to start this already!
>
> For those of you who were not on the codesprint: the talk about
> deploying an open source stack for conference management software in
> OSGeo was to have a tool not only for the international event but also
> for local and regional events. If I'm not mistaken, the stack
> suggested was the same used in FOSSGIS (?) and has ticketing system,
> program planning and mobile app:
> https://pretix.eu/about/en/
>
> I wasn't the full conversation so maybe there were more options discussed
> there.
>
> In my opinion, we should get rid of Attendify ASAP. For a start, it is
> not GDPR compliant (!!!!!), it has a strong vendor lock-in and, what
> is worse, costs a lot of money every year (compared with open source
> options) :-/ Let's apply what we always say of using "licensing" money
> to extend and own the open source software :)
>
> At the same time, we could suggest options but we shouldn't force any
> decision over the LOCs because maybe in some countries the software
> stack chosen is not available/feasible/useful/possible for who knows
> what reason. Thinking for example on blocked countries of the origin
> company.
>
> Cross-posting to the local-chapters mailing list, where I think the
> conversation was going to take place once people arrive at home. So in
> case someone is there, conversation just started! Also there was
> movement to start some shared knowledge between regional chapters
> about how to build community and organize events. But maybe that
> should continue only on the local-chapters mailing list?
>
> Thanks for bringing this up!
> María.
>
> On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 4:59 PM Gavin Fleming <gavin at kartoza.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all
> >
> > The topic of consistent conference infrastructure came up again at
> Bucharest, with the emphasis on giving conference teams maximum space to
> focus on the conference rather than selecting and building new back-ends
> each time. I’ve recently experienced ‘Open Source Event Manager’ [1]
> through my interaction with the Postgresconf coming up in Johannesburg [2].
> It was a pleasant and slick experience and seems to do most of what a
> FOSS4G would need.
> >
> > If we like it (or something else) we could specify it for 2021 (along
> with Attendify which seems to be and accepted component now)
> >
> > Gavin
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/PostgresConf/pgem, which is a fork of
> https://github.com/openSUSE/osem
> > [2] https://postgresconf.org/
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Gavin Fleming - Joint MD - PrGISc [PGP1234]
> > Visit http://kartoza.com to find out about open source:
> > * Desktop GIS programming services
> > * Geospatial web development
> > * GIS Training
> > * Consulting Services
> > Skype: phlemingo
> > Office: +27(0)878092702
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Conference_dev mailing list
> > Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev



-- 
Michael Terner
ternergeo at gmail.com
(M) 978-631-6602
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/local-chapters/attachments/20190902/2b451d37/attachment.html>