[MSF-Discuss] Poll: Foundation Naming

[Allan Doyle]

OGC was originally OGF.

Open GRASS Foundation -> Open GIS Consortium -> Open Geospatial Consortium

I don't think Open Geo Foundation is distinct enough from Open
Geospatial Consortium

	Allan

On 2/1/06, Blammo <bob.basques at ci.stpaul.mn.us> wrote:
>  All,
>
>  Just to mix it up a bit.  (and it's probably been said already, I can't
> believe I just came up with it)
>
>  How about :
>
>  "Open Geo Foundation"  -  OGF
>
>  I didn't do any comprehensive searches, but a quick Google doesn't turn up
> anything confusing for OGF
>
>  It's short, not cute at all, says it all, and seems to address everything
> I've read this morning.
>
>  bobb
>
>
>
>
>  Frank Warmerdam wrote:
>  On 2/1/06, Tyler Mitchell <tylermitchell at shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>
>  I also think that "open source" carries some weight but some of it is 'bad'
> weight. There are very ambitious marketing campaigns that malign "open
> source" and other campaigns that seem to aim to twist the term "open" until
> it is meaningless. While open source is a central philosophy to the
> foundation, it is something we identify with, but not something we need to
> cling to for identifying us. Our projects will have plenty of merits apart
> from our licensing philosophy.
>
>  Tyler,
>
> In my opinion "Open Source" or "Free (as in freedom)" is the
> fundamental philosophy of the foundation. As much as some
> might try and malign open source, I don't think we can in way
> shy away from it. It may not need to be in the name, but it needs
> to be in the first paragraph on the web site.
>
> Furthermore, if it came down to an acronym type name, I
> would *much* prefer OSGF (Open Source Geospatial Foundation)
> to OGSF (Open Geospatial Software Foundation) as the later
> loses the assurance that the software is truely free. Open is
> easily abused, but "Open Source" can be given a specific meaning
> by reference to the OSD (Open Source Definition).
>
> To further stress this point, I think it ought to be written into the
> "constitution" that the foundation itself only adopts projects that
> have OSI approved licenses, and that the foundation board
> shall not have the power to alter foundation owned code to a non
> OSI license.
>
> I think it is rare that I get sticky about FOSS political correctness
> but as we set down the bedrock of our foundation I think it is
> important to have this principle clear.
>
> Best regards,
> --
> ---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
> I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam at pobox.com
> light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
> and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Programmer for Rent
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.mapserverfoundation.org
> http://lists.mapserverfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>