epiphany about the idea of the Foundation

[David Bitner]

I would think that as members or whatever the lowest level of
participation, anyone should be able -- and be encouraged -- to
participate regardless of whether they plan to use/support/whatever
any of the foundations products.  It would then be these members who
should be able to vote for those that get to make the decisions.  I
don't think that any company be that DM, Autodesk, or Joe's Mapserver
Shack should automatically have a seat on the board of directors for
the foundation.  Perhaps there could be automatic seats on an advisory
committee, but the board itself should be picked by the community. 
That being said if I thought that someone from Autodesk or ESRI for
that matter had something valuable to bring to the table I wouldn't
hesitate to vote for them.


On 11/29/05, Gary Lang <gary.lang at autodesk.com> wrote:
> Hi Gary,
>
> Gary from Autodesk here.
>
> I am doing this as we speak. In fact I started making my first calls
> about 2 weeks ago. I just got a call from one 2 minutes ago from someone
> at one those companies and they are interested in discussing what it
> would mean to join.
>
> Involving other companies is actually something I have been clear I
> wanted to do from the outset. Since I'm good acquaintances with my peers
> at most of those companies and had hinted at our open source intentions
> before with some of them, I am hopeful they will join us in this
> adventure based on initial interest.
>
> Now, let me ask people here something, in my mind, if someone wants to
> join the foundation, they should contribute something to the foundation
> or agree to either support or use MapServer in their products, though.
> What do you think? And to be clear, I wouldn't care which code base they
> wanted to use.
>
> I will address your comments about foundation control in another email.
> Suffice it to say that we'd be incredibly stupid to help establish a
> foundation in which Autodesk or any other corporate entity has "control"
> - who would want to contribute their work if we did that? We wouldn't.
>
> Gary
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: UMN MapServer Users List [mailto:MAPSERVER-USERS at LISTS.UMN.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Gary Watry
> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 11:30 AM
> To: MAPSERVER-USERS at LISTS.UMN.EDU
> Subject: [UMN_MAPSERVER-USERS] epiphany about the idea of the Foundation
>
> Being as this is a non-profit open source Foundation, I hope that we
> will
> ask the other commercial Internet map software companies to join the
> Foundation in the same manner as AutoDesk.
>
> This should include ESRI, Integraph, Microstation, MapInfo, DeLorme, etc
> etc
>
> Anyone who has a vested interest in Internet Mapping should be asked to
> contribute and participate. If they opt not to - fine - but then they
> are on
> record for choosing not to play
>
> But then the contributors could insure their other products were
> compatible
> with MapServer(OS) and that it was compatible with their products.
>
> The two fold benefit to this is
> 1. the foundation will not be concieved as a partner to Autodesk
> 2. Autodesk or no other Commercial company will control the Foundation
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Gary L. Watry
>
> GIS Coordinator
> Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies
> FSU / COAPS
> Johnson Building, RM 215
> 2035 East Paul Dirac Drive
> Tallahassee, Florida 32306-2840
>
> E-Mail: watry at coaps.fsu.edu
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: UMN MapServer Users List [mailto:MAPSERVER-USERS at LISTS.UMN.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Lester Caine
> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 2:06 PM
> To: MAPSERVER-USERS at LISTS.UMN.EDU
> Subject: Re: [UMN_MAPSERVER-USERS] current OS license
>
> Charlton Purvis wrote:
>
> > Hi, folks:
> >
> > Although there continues to be an open source spirit surrounding the
> code
> > amid the launch of a MS Foundation, I'd like to ask for clarification
> re.
> > the license of the MS code as it stands now.
> >
> > If for whatever reason a company like Autodesk (or I guess it would
> have
> to
> > be the Foundation) wanted to slap some kind of non-open source license
> on
> > the code, is it true that the current code we call MapServer in its
> current
> > state will always remain covered under the license below?  Basically
> I'm
> > trying to make sure that a shop can't somehow repossess something that
> was
> > originally OS thus preventing folks from using it like it's being used
> now.
>
> Borland tried it with Interbase, but Firebird is now freely available
> and there is not a lot Borland can now do about it ;)
> I am sure Autocad have a 'hidden agenda' but as long as there are free
> versions of what ever is needed to provide a working system then there
> will not be a problem. Anything commercial will have to be worth the
> money to make any sales :)
>
> p.s. I am not seeing my posts to the list so if you get this Charlton
> and it's not on the list please can you forward it :(
>
> --
> Lester Caine
> -----------------------------
> L.S.Caine Electronic Services
> Treasurer - Firebird Foundation Inc.
>