[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: osgeo-discuss
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: OSGeo/LocationTech relationship
From: Michael Smith <michael.smith.erdc () gmail ! com>
Date: 2015-11-17 1:27:43
Message-ID: D26FEC5B.11D787%michael.smith () erdc ! dren ! mil
[Download RAW message or body]
[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]
I believe that narrative B best fits what I know about LocationTech and
their interactions with OSGeo.
Note that this is my personal opinion.
----
Michael Smith
OSGeo Foundation Treasurer
treasurer@osgeo.org
From: Discuss <discuss-bounces@lists.osgeo.org> on behalf of Rob Emanuele
<rdemanuele@gmail.com>
Date: Monday, November 16, 2015 at 7:59 PM
To: Mateusz Loskot <mateusz@loskot.net>
Cc: OSGeo Discussions <discuss@lists.osgeo.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo/LocationTech relationship
Resent-From: Michael Smith <michael.smith@usace.army.mil>
> I think there's two narratives that are at conflict in this entire thread. I'm
> going to try to try to spell them out as I see them:
>
> A. LocationTech is a newer-than-OSGeo organization that is trying to make a
> name for itself, capture market share, promote it's brand, in general act in a
> way that makes itself grow. The intention behind LocationTech's actions in
> offering services as a professional conference organizer is mostly for it's
> own gain; LocationTech wants to smoothly slide into becoming a part of OSGeo's
> annual conference for the profit and promotion of itself, to the potential
> loss of OSGeo. For that reason, it is best for the OSGeo community to protect
> itself from LocationTech, keep measured distance between the organizations,
> not allow it to become part of the FOSS4G international event, or at least to
> be suspicious of it's stated good intentions in offering itself to be PCO. The
> real story is that LocationTech's intentions are primarily about the profits
> and higher visibility it will gain from being part of FOSS4G, and the help it
> is offering plays a secondary role.
>
> B. LocationTech is an organization that was created out of intentions to help
> parts of the community that were perhaps not best served by OSGeo at the time.
> It has it's own governance and ways of doing things, which include being
> backed by small and large companies looking to contribute financial support to
> the open source community, which allows for things like paid staff. The model
> is different than OSGeo, the structure is different than OSGeo, and the aims
> are similar but have differences. One differences is that it's parent
> organization is the Eclipse Foundation, who have professional conference
> organizers on staff and a lot of experience running successful conferences.
> Seeing this is a valuable thing that the open source geospatial community can
> take advantage of, LocationTech offers it's services as a professional
> conference organizer to the FOSS4G NA regional conferences, and now has
> offered it's services to the international conference in 2017. While certainly
> not eschewing the increase in visibility in the community that being part of
> the conferences would afford LocationTech, that plays a secondary role to the
> earnest desire to help the open source geospatial community.
>
> Have I captured these narratives correctly or incorrectly? They are based on
> impressions and implicit opinions that I've tried to understand from these
> conversations. I think perhaps explicitly stating them would be useful, so if
> I have failed to do so correctly please correct me.
>
> I obviously have a preference for believing that narrative B best fits the
> reality of the situation. Self promotion surely must play some role in
> LocationTech's actions, but is it naive to think that the intentions of
> LocationTech are for the community first and itself second? Perhaps. I don't
> think so though. The alternative is certainly not how I operate when I
> participate in LocationTech.
>
> I prefer the narrative of openness and trust vs the narrative of mistrust and
> suspicion that sounds like bad politics. I hope that this community that I
> choose to participate in is not such a political mess that breeds that sort of
> selfish market share power plays, and instead it is a community of people and
> organizations that take actions based on how they can contribute to an overall
> good.
>
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Mateusz Loskot <mateusz@loskot.net> wrote:
>> On 16 November 2015 at 23:11, Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > If I was to sum up the difference in outlook between the two organizations
>>> > today it would more be along the lines of LocationTech being "developer
>>> > focused" and OSGeo being "user focused'. I think that is more a reflection
>>> > of where the projects involved are in their incubation process that any
>>> > strategic difference.
>>
>> Jody,
>>
>> I have to admit, to me as OSGeo member as developer (+SAC supporter),
>> this whole thread has not clarified almost nothing.
>>
>> As much as I appreciate (and carefully read through) all your inputs,
>> that summary leaves me with even more questions.
>>
>> And, BTW, I agree with you about the FAQ, it also reads naive and silly
>> (e.g. comparing Apache vs Mozilla, two different scopes, to
>> LocationTech vs OSGeo,
>> two with clear overlap).
>>
>> Putting all the emotional cream whipped so far aside and objectively,
>> clearly, that it is all about potential, capacity and market share.
>>
>> OSGeo has proved its potential, it is capable to paddle its own canoe
>> for a decade or more,
>> via large self-organized community and successful projects.
>>
>> LocationTech is a fairly new player with huge & rich organization behind,
>> that has to prove it's capable to secure market share, and its position.
>> Otherwise, the parent organization will simply shut it down as any
>> failed project.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> --
>> Mateusz Loskot, BlockedBlockedhttp://mateusz.loskot.netBlocked
>
[Attachment #5 (text/html)]
<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; \
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; \
font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;"><div><div>I believe that narrative B best fits \
what I know about LocationTech and their interactions with \
OSGeo.</div><div><br></div><div>Note that this is my personal \
opinion.</div><div><br></div><div><div><div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" \
color="#000000"><font class="Apple-style-span" \
face="Calibri">----</font></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" \
color="#000000"><font class="Apple-style-span" face="Calibri">Michael \
Smith</font></font></div><div><div>OSGeo Foundation Treasurer</div><div><a \
href="mailto:treasurer@osgeo.org">treasurer@osgeo.org</a></div></div></div></div><div><br></div></div></div><div><br></div><span \
id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION"><div style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:11pt; \
text-align:left; color:black; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; \
PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt \
solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt"><span \
style="font-weight:bold">From: </span> Discuss <<a \
href="mailto:discuss-bounces@lists.osgeo.org">discuss-bounces@lists.osgeo.org</a>> \
on behalf of Rob Emanuele <<a \
href="mailto:rdemanuele@gmail.com">rdemanuele@gmail.com</a>><br><span \
style="font-weight:bold">Date: </span> Monday, November 16, 2015 at 7:59 PM<br><span \
style="font-weight:bold">To: </span> Mateusz Loskot <<a \
href="mailto:mateusz@loskot.net">mateusz@loskot.net</a>><br><span \
style="font-weight:bold">Cc: </span> OSGeo Discussions <<a \
href="mailto:discuss@lists.osgeo.org">discuss@lists.osgeo.org</a>><br><span \
style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span> [EXTERNAL] Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] \
OSGeo/LocationTech relationship<br><span style="font-weight:bold">Resent-From: \
</span> Michael Smith <<a \
href="mailto:michael.smith@usace.army.mil">michael.smith@usace.army.mil</a>><br></div><div><br></div><blockquote \
id="MAC_OUTLOOK_ATTRIBUTION_BLOCKQUOTE" style="BORDER-LEFT: #b5c4df 5 solid; \
PADDING:0 0 0 5; MARGIN:0 0 0 5;"><div><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" \
content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><div><div dir="ltr"><div>I think there's two \
narratives that are at conflict in this entire thread. I'm going to try to try to \
spell them out as I see them:</div><div><br></div><div>A. LocationTech is a \
newer-than-OSGeo organization that is trying to make a name for itself, capture \
market share, promote it's brand, in general act in a way that makes itself grow. The \
intention behind LocationTech's actions in offering services as a professional \
conference organizer is mostly for it's own gain; LocationTech wants to smoothly \
slide into becoming a part of OSGeo's annual conference for the profit and promotion \
of itself, to the potential loss of OSGeo. For that reason, it is best for the OSGeo \
community to protect itself from LocationTech, keep measured distance between the \
organizations, not allow it to become part of the FOSS4G international event, or at \
least to be suspicious of it's stated good intentions in offering itself to be PCO. \
The real story is that LocationTech's intentions are primarily about the profits and \
higher visibility it will gain from being part of FOSS4G, and the help it is offering \
plays a secondary role.</div><div><br></div><div>B. LocationTech is an organization \
that was created out of intentions to help parts of the community that were perhaps \
not best served by OSGeo at the time. It has it's own governance and ways of doing \
things, which include being backed by small and large companies looking to \
contribute financial support to the open source community, which allows for things \
like paid staff. The model is different than OSGeo, the structure is different than \
OSGeo, and the aims are similar but have differences. One differences is that it's \
parent organization is the Eclipse Foundation, who have professional conference \
organizers on staff and a lot of experience running successful conferences. Seeing \
this is a valuable thing that the open source geospatial community can take advantage \
of, LocationTech offers it's services as a professional conference organizer to the \
FOSS4G NA regional conferences, and now has offered it's services to the \
international conference in 2017. While certainly not eschewing the increase in \
visibility in the community that being part of the conferences would afford \
LocationTech, that plays a secondary role to the earnest desire to help the open \
source geospatial community.</div><div><br></div><div>Have I captured these \
narratives correctly or incorrectly? They are based on impressions and implicit \
opinions that I've tried to understand from these conversations. I think perhaps \
explicitly stating them would be useful, so if I have failed to do so correctly \
please correct me.</div><div><br></div><div>I obviously have a preference for \
believing that narrative B best fits the reality of the situation. Self promotion \
surely must play some role in LocationTech's actions, but is it naive to think that \
the intentions of LocationTech are for the community first and itself second? \
Perhaps. I don't think so though. The alternative is certainly not how I operate when \
I participate in LocationTech.</div><div><br></div><div>I prefer the narrative of \
openness and trust vs the narrative of mistrust and suspicion that sounds like bad \
politics. I hope that this community that I choose to participate in is not such a \
political mess that breeds that sort of selfish market share power plays, and \
instead it is a community of people and organizations that take actions based on how \
they can contribute to an overall good.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div \
class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Mateusz Loskot <span dir="ltr"> \
<<a href="mailto:mateusz@loskot.net" \
target="_blank">mateusz@loskot.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc \
solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On 16 November 2015 at 23:11, Jody Garnett \
<<a href="mailto:jody.garnett@gmail.com">jody.garnett@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br> \
> If I was to sum up the difference in outlook between the two organizations<br> \
> today it would more be along the lines of LocationTech being "developer<br> > \
focused" and OSGeo being "user focused'. I think that is more a reflection<br> > \
of where the projects involved are in their incubation process that any<br> > \
strategic difference.<br><br></span>Jody,<br><br> I have to admit, to me as OSGeo \
member as developer (+SAC supporter),<br> this whole thread has not clarified almost \
nothing.<br><br> As much as I appreciate (and carefully read through) all your \
inputs,<br> that summary leaves me with even more questions.<br><br>
And, BTW, I agree with you about the FAQ, it also reads naive and silly<br>
(e.g. comparing Apache vs Mozilla, two different scopes, to<br>
LocationTech vs OSGeo,<br>
two with clear overlap).<br><br>
Putting all the emotional cream whipped so far aside and objectively,<br>
clearly, that it is all about potential, capacity and market share.<br><br>
OSGeo has proved its potential, it is capable to paddle its own canoe<br>
for a decade or more,<br>
via large self-organized community and successful projects.<br><br>
LocationTech is a fairly new player with huge & rich organization behind,<br>
that has to prove it's capable to secure market share, and its position.<br>
Otherwise, the parent organization will simply shut it down as any<br>
failed project.<br><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
Best regards,<br>
--<br>
Mateusz Loskot, <a href="BlockedBlockedhttp://mateusz.loskot.netBlocked" \
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"> \
BlockedBlockedhttp://mateusz.loskot.netBlocked</a><br></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div></blockquote></span></body></html>
[Attachment #6 (text/plain)]
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic