"Geospatial Foundation" Meeting

[Paul Ramsey]

Puneet,

Starting from the bottom, the meeting will be at a neutral location,  
the Westin O'Hare, about 2km from O'Hare airport.  To give you a  
flavor of the event participants will be engaging in, my own  
itinerary involves leaving my family at noon on Friday, arriving at  
8pm in Chicago, transferring to the hotel, sleeping, spending the day  
meeting, and getting on a plane first thing Sunday morning arriving  
home at 2pm.  It is a good thing I like planes.

Regarding "conflict of interest", whose?  As influence peddling goes,  
muffins and a day in a conference room at an airport Westin is pretty  
paltry fare.  Autodesk wants to get their open source offering out,  
and they need a foundation to put it in.  They will make one  
regardless, to put it in.  To their credit, they are bending over  
backwards to ensure that the foundation they establish is as  
welcoming to as many other open source projects as possible.  They  
are ensuring the foundation is welcoming by soliciting the input of  
as many other projects as possible.

At the end of the day, this will not be Autodesk's foundation, it  
will be the larger community's, and you will be able to tell by  
looking at the makeup of the BoD (I have no advance knowledge here, I  
am merely guessing).  Corporations are not generous for fun, they are  
generous in the pursuit of their interests and, in this case, it is  
in Autodesk's interest to ensure the foundation their project is  
managed within is vital, self-sustaining, and legitimate to the  
larger open source community.  That is the backdrop of their  
generosity in paying travel costs for some of the participants, and  
for the room in Chicago.

Finally, since much of this mistrust of intentions seems to flow  
solely from the "Mapserver Enterprise" (MSE) naming issue, it is  
worth reminding everyone that MSE was considered acceptable by  
everyone who signed the open letter, a group that was largely  
composed of people from the Mapserver community itself.  They were  
*wrong*, but their mistake was an honest one made with the best  
intentions, and no one from that group has since stood up and said  
"Autodesk made us do it": in fact they have stood up and said the  
opposite, that the suggestion came from their side of the table  
originally.  So while the MSE naming debacle was a mistake, it can  
not be used as some token of Autodesk's malign intent in assisting in  
setting up this foundation.  The lesson of the MSE episode is that  
many eyes make mistakes like MSE impossible, hence the emphasis on  
openness for this meeting.

Autodesk wants a strong, independent foundation with a broad  
membership to put their product.  We also want a strong independent  
foundation with a broad membership.  We all have the same destination  
in mind, and are motives for getting there are the same too.  Let's go.

Paul


On Jan 14, 2006, at 6:43 AM, Puneet Kishor wrote:

> On Jan 13, 2006, at 11:32 AM, Paul Ramsey wrote:
>
>> In order to help move along the process of starting an "open  
>> source geospatial foundation" there will be a face-to-face meeting  
>> in Chicago, Westin O'Hare, on February 4, 2006, hosted by  
>> Autodesk. In conceiving of this meeting, we have tried (and will  
>> continue to try) to follow these principles:
>>
>> - Inclusion. Members from a number of different open source  
>> projects have been invited (see the list so far below) and  
>> Autodesk has offered to pay the travel costs of some of these  
>> invitees in order to ensure they can attend if they cannot afford  
>> it otherwise. Anyone else is also welcome to attend physically or  
>> virtually (see below).
>
> Thanks to everyone for making this possible. There is a potential  
> problem with the above (note: I have said "potential," hence, it is  
> entirely possible that there may be no problem at all).
>
> The meeting is hosted by Autodesk, and Autodesk will also pay for  
> some of the attendees to attend the meeting. Most of the negative  
> reaction to the initial announcement stemmed from a feeling of a  
> free/open source project and its name and goodwill being usurped by  
> a for-profit, closed source, publicly held corporation. Most  
> everyone welcomed Autodesk, but most everyone did not want to have  
> the MapServer Enterprise name applied to their product.
>
> I hope Autodesk's financial underwriting of the above event will  
> not create a conflict of interest of any sort. Would it be  
> worthwhile publicly announcing the event so other private  
> corporations have an equal opportunity to attend/sponsor/represent  
> at the event?
>
> Personally, I am happy that the meeting is at a place that I can  
> attend. Well, it is 150 miles from here, but I can drive there on  
> my own steam without feeling obligated to anyone. But, it would  
> have been nicer to have the meeting at a "neutral" location and  
> perhaps even at a neutral event. For example, the meeting could be  
> held at UMN, or even at a "rented" meeting room at O'Hare -- I  
> would be happy to chip in toward the cost from my pocket if the  
> expense is reasonable.
>
> In any case, I believe this is an important and concrete step  
> forward, and I welcome and support it. As long as we come to the  
> meeting with an open and constructive mind, there shouldn't be any  
> issue. Thanks again, to all those who made it possible (and that  
> includes Autodesk).
>
> --
> Puneet Kishor
>