| 02:13:54 | sh: | hi |
| 02:38:40 | uchoa: | hi. |
| 03:15:36 | bartvde: | when is the meeting starting? |
| 03:22:07 | uchoa: | 1:30 to start... |
| 03:31:44 | uchoa: | 1h to start... |
| 03:33:22 | uchoa: | in Brazil ( here ): 10:30 am, in Chicago: 7:30 am. |
| 03:37:29 | bartvde: | I do see the logs on the logs.qgis.org site but not in my chatzilla :- ) |
| 04:37:20 | gsherman_: | February 4th meeting discussions ( http://tinyurl.com/85fhu ) || Channel log: http://logs.qgis.org/geofoundation || Saturday phone in info: http://tinyurl.com/dh47u || Mtg agenda: http://tinyurl.com/d6659 || Meeting starts at 17:30 UTC |
| 04:37:22 | sigq: | Title: [MSF-Discuss] "Geospatial Foundation" Meeting ( at tinyurl.com ) |
| 04:48:22 | : | * FrankW arrives at the meeting a bit early. |
| 04:49:47 | nhv: | g'morning Frank |
| 05:20:17 | hobu: | good morning |
| 05:20:19 | nhv: | who is doing the transcribing to IRC today ? |
| 05:20:26 | nhv: | g'morn |
| 05:20:44 | hobu: | dunno. I'm sure I'll do plenty |
| 05:20:53 | Schuyler: | I'll volunteer also |
| 05:23:42 | TylerM: | FYI - gsherman is logging the channel and also has op |
| 05:29:32 | nhv: | Schuyler youI have to go to a customer's but I will be live this afternoon |
| 05:30:37 | TylerM: | FYI- Call in numbers will be active shortly |
| 05:30:45 | TylerM: | See http://lists.mapserverfoundation.org/pipermail/discuss/2006-February/000519.html |
| 05:30:46 | sigq: | Title: [MSF-Discuss] Call-in numbers for Saturday's Meeting ( at lists.mapserverfoundation.org ) |
| 05:30:55 | TylerM: | for numbers |
| 05:31:37 | adoyle: | yo yo yo! |
| 05:32:24 | AlainGrignon: | Hello all.. has the meeting started yet? |
| 05:32:32 | adoyle: | Just getting set up |
| 05:32:48 | adoyle: | Still working on the speakerphone/conferenc call thing |
| 05:34:05 | TylerM: | As some of you will notice..those of us on the floor of the meeting are the ones coming in from starwoodbroadband.com |
| 05:35:38 | TylerM: | Has anyone tried the outside phone in line? |
| 05:35:46 | danmo: | I'm on it |
| 05:35:56 | danmo: | I hear Frank talking about PCI, tell him those days are over |
| 05:36:17 | FrankW: | I was afraid it was dangerous having the mic close to me. |
| 05:36:22 | danmo: | lol |
| 05:36:32 | AlainGrignon: | I'm on the line as well |
| 05:36:37 | : | * FrankW moves the mic a bit away. |
| 05:36:42 | TylerM: | They moved the mic, now you will here Paul's private thoughts : ) |
| 05:36:49 | danmo: | : ) |
| 05:42:34 | FrankW: | The meeting opens. |
| 05:43:25 | Schuyler: | Gary Lang of Autodesk is introducing himself as a meeting facilitator, and reviewing the structure of the meeting |
| 05:47:06 | garylang_: | If anyone is listening over the phone, let us know if you can't hear us |
| 05:47:17 | Schuyler: | so, people are introducing themselves |
| 05:47:22 | gsherman: | fyi, folks need to speak up |
| 05:47:24 | danmo: | we heard you well Gary, not hearing the current ones so well |
| 05:47:36 | garylang_: | ok |
| 05:47:37 | adoyle: | heck, it's hard to hear some people in here, too! |
| 05:48:30 | Schuyler: | they're already halfway around but let's see if we can get caught up. |
| 05:48:44 | danmo: | yup, perfect |
| 05:48:55 | Schuyler: | Paul Ramsey, Arnulf Christl, Frank Warmderdam, and Howard Butler at one end |
| 05:49:00 | Schuyler: | who's the gent from LizardTech? |
| 05:49:11 | mpg: | Michael P. Gerlek, LizardTech guy |
| 05:49:23 | danmo: | mic is getting bad again |
| 05:49:29 | gsherman: | tyler's being shy, can't hear him : ) |
| 05:49:46 | garylang_: | Better now? |
| 05:49:54 | gsherman: | yes |
| 05:49:56 | danmo: | DEpends on the people. Jon is better |
| 05:50:03 | garylang_: | k |
| 05:50:16 | Schuyler: | then me ( Schuyler Erle ), Steve Lime, Rick Steele... is that Tom Burk next to him? |
| 05:50:23 | FrankW: | yes |
| 05:50:25 | garylang_: | Yees |
| 05:50:59 | Schuyler: | Markus Neteler, Claude Philipona, Bob Bray, Daniel Brookshier, Ian Turton, Allan Doyle |
| 05:51:44 | Schuyler: | Tyler Mitchell, Mark Lucas, Jon Scarbrough, Perry Nacionales, David McIlhagga, Brian Behlendorf, Laura Rivera, Gary Lang, John Weathersby and Chris Holmes |
| 05:52:30 | Schuyler: | Gary's showing results of the pre-meeting naming poll |
| 05:52:47 | Schuyler: | 18 people chose MapTools Foundation, and 18 chose Open Geospatial Software Foundation |
| 05:52:58 | Schuyler: | as their first choices. |
| 05:53:11 | Schuyler: | there's some dispute over OGSF / OSGF : ) |
| 05:53:45 | Schuyler: | clearly the issues have not changed since they were discussed on the list : ) |
| 05:54:17 | TylerM: | Some pics: http://spatialguru.com/~tyler/chicago/images.html |
| 05:54:24 | sigq: | Title: Image Gallery for /home/tyler/public_html/chicago/ ( at spatialguru.com ) |
| 05:54:29 | TylerM: | I think that should work ? |
| 05:54:46 | danmo: | Thx TylerM |
| 05:54:47 | gsherman: | thanks TylerM |
| 05:55:14 | gsherman: | TylerM, if you take them fast enough we can get a video stream |
| 05:55:18 | danmo: | what was that last comment ( the good point? ) |
| 05:55:57 | FrankW: | Schuyler is making a case for Mercator foundation. |
| 05:56:05 | FrankW: | We shoot him down. |
| 05:56:12 | Schuyler: | I had to try : ) |
| 05:56:34 | mpg: | Thanks anyway -- ( mercator.org is still open, we can fork now... ) |
| 05:56:50 | Schuyler: | and the domain is available! |
| 05:56:59 | gsherman: | not anymore : ) |
| 05:58:24 | Schuyler: | Gary asks if the pre-meeting vote ( 21 - 18 for OGSF/OSGF ) can be taken as binding |
| 05:58:37 | Schuyler: | several people have suggested that this might not be idea |
| 05:58:39 | garylang_: | Danmo - what is the domain we own - OSGF or OGSF |
| 05:58:51 | danmo: | lemme check |
| 05:59:19 | danmo: | osgeospatial.org ? |
| 05:59:55 | danmo: | Note: osgeo.org is still available |
| 05:59:56 | gsherman: | which is it? osgf or ogsf? |
| 06:00:10 | jmckenna: | i though tyler said the vote was 18-18 ? |
| 06:00:13 | Schuyler: | I think that still hasn't been decided : ) |
| 06:00:22 | mpg: | OSGF seems to be falling in line.. |
| 06:00:30 | brian_b: | ogsf.org is available |
| 06:00:33 | brian_b: | short is sweet |
| 06:00:33 | Schuyler: | I said that... but it turns out that another 3 votes were for OSGF |
| 06:00:38 | jmckenna: | k |
| 06:00:54 | : | * FrankW voted for Maptools, but has since reconsidered. |
| 06:01:10 | brian_b: | osgf.org is the "open gaming foundation" |
| 06:01:13 | : | * danmo didn't vote, he got fired from the naming committed a while ago |
| 06:01:22 | : | * gsherman votes for osgf |
| 06:01:25 | jmckenna: | i voted for osgf |
| 06:01:26 | Schuyler: | what's the preference of people on IRC? |
| 06:01:27 | AlainGrignon: | OSGF is good with me.. lets move on!! |
| 06:01:48 | danmo: | my pref is osgf over ogsf |
| 06:02:37 | FrankW: | We had essentially universal acceptance of OSGF ( and osgeospatial.org ) here in the room. |
| 06:02:40 | brian_b: | yeah, "ogg ess eff" is awkward to say |
| 06:02:54 | Schuyler: | a substantial show of hands here seem to prefer OSGF/OGSF |
| 06:03:06 | fk: | osgf sounds better than ogsf |
| 06:03:31 | ominiverdi: | osgf! |
| 06:03:32 | AlainGrignon: | It is also easier to expand it to OSGeoSpatial |
| 06:03:52 | danmo: | +1 |
| 06:04:06 | mpg: | Brian has it |
| 06:04:12 | FrankW: | now proposal to use osgeo.org for url. |
| 06:04:26 | danmo: | +1 for osgeo.org |
| 06:04:34 | ominiverdi: | +1 |
| 06:04:41 | jmckenna: | +1 |
| 06:04:55 | Schuyler: | ok here's the proposal |
| 06:04:59 | danmo: | let me know and I'll register it ( I promise to give it to the foundation after ) |
| 06:05:20 | Schuyler: | domain = osgeo.org |
| 06:05:28 | Schuyler: | name = open source geospatial foundation |
| 06:05:28 | AlainGrignon: | If I can make a suggestion... |
| 06:05:30 | mpg: | "The OSGeo People" |
| 06:05:43 | Schuyler: | <brian_b> and we'd introduce ourselves as "the OSGeo people" |
| 06:05:58 | Schuyler: | Gary is about to push the big red button |
| 06:06:10 | AlainGrignon: | www.osgeospatial.org already points to the mapserver foundation site.. why not keep it the way it is.. it's quite clear. |
| 06:06:13 | gsherman: | what's the button do? |
| 06:06:15 | Schuyler: | there seems to be consensus about that. |
| 06:06:25 | FrankW: | The button buys the domains. |
| 06:06:29 | gsherman: | ah |
| 06:06:30 | Schuyler: | gsherman: buying the osgeo.{org,net,com} domain |
| 06:06:52 | Schuyler: | round of applause over naming consensus |
| 06:06:53 | FrankW: | It is settled... |
| 06:07:19 | jmckenna: | ( thank god ) |
| 06:07:27 | jfournier: | sweet |
| 06:07:38 | sh: | good job buys |
| 06:08:35 | Schuyler: | now Gary has asked us to go around and answer the pre-meeting questions |
| 06:08:36 | danmo: | volume++ |
| 06:08:47 | Schuyler: | on reasons why we would/would not want to participate |
| 06:08:52 | Schuyler: | in the foundation. |
| 06:09:05 | pramsey: | I don't think we are going to be able to have everyone address all these questions. |
| 06:09:08 | pramsey: | Or even one of them. |
| 06:09:17 | pramsey: | Time and tide wait for no man. |
| 06:09:23 | Schuyler: | I wish I could transcribe everything that cholmes just said |
| 06:09:25 | mpg: | 3 mins * 25 persons = ... |
| 06:09:33 | Schuyler: | although I think he has said most of this on the mailing list |
| 06:09:47 | garylang_: | Waste of time? |
| 06:09:58 | AlainGrignon: | definately.. |
| 06:10:10 | mpg: | Everyone gets just 12 words ( a la FooCamp model ) |
| 06:10:14 | Schuyler: | maybe we should constrain this to discuss that hasn't been or can't be had on the mailing list |
| 06:10:24 | Schuyler: | or what mpg said : ) |
| 06:10:25 | AlainGrignon: | You're all there to participate.. I think the reasons are irrelevant at this point... |
| 06:10:43 | iant_: | Chris will have said everything before it gets round to this end of the table :- ) |
| 06:11:06 | Schuyler: | it's good we started with him |
| 06:11:14 | Schuyler: | Gary's summary of Chris's comments: |
| 06:11:25 | Schuyler: | ( 1 ) wants continuity without "big money" |
| 06:11:36 | Schuyler: | ( 2 ) For fee consultation should not compete with members |
| 06:11:58 | Schuyler: | ( 3 ) participants should not dump code willy nilly into the foundation and dilute the brand |
| 06:12:09 | Schuyler: | ( 4 ) signing over IP is scary to some |
| 06:12:17 | Schuyler: | I know the Mapbuilder developers are worried about that |
| 06:13:25 | Schuyler: | Chris's reasons for joining are access to documentation, forum for commuication with other members ( particularly in developing technical standards ), hosting, and better association with other projects |
| 06:13:38 | Schuyler: | I missed what John just said |
| 06:13:47 | danmo: | re IP: the foundation's "constitution" should include a clause that prevents it from relicensing code under a non-OSI approved, I think that was suggested on the list |
| 06:14:10 | hobu: | John Weathersby said that now is the time to do it and that the leaders that stand up to do so will be the defining thing |
| 06:14:25 | Schuyler: | Gary is outlining ADSK's reasons for wanting to participate |
| 06:14:41 | Schuyler: | other than the business benefits of open sourcing MapGuide |
| 06:15:02 | Schuyler: | he says they also want to "help legitimize G/FOSS in the enterprise" |
| 06:15:57 | mpg: | GFOSS is already legit in enterprise -- I think if anything we need to just add "geo" to the pool of legit thing things |
| 06:16:54 | Schuyler: | Brian Behlendorf is expressing the importance of decentralized access to mapping technology |
| 06:17:04 | Schuyler: | ( including data, apparently ) |
| 06:17:09 | brian_b: | yep : ) |
| 06:17:24 | mpg: | BB: GOOG good, but monocultire risk |
| 06:17:42 | Schuyler: | David McIlhagga expresses an interest in legal protection for G/FOSS developers and for the software underlying his business |
| 06:17:53 | Schuyler: | ( much like what the ASF provides ) |
| 06:18:23 | Schuyler: | also a safe operating space for collaborating on s/w development, and a professional face to the associated projects |
| 06:18:37 | brian_b: | I realize this is about mapping tech and not necessarily data, but if we could put good geospatial management tools in the hands of everyone, we might see the owners of that data ( such as municipalities or counties who maintain survey information ) publishing that data through web services more often |
| 06:18:50 | brian_b: | rather than relying upon single companies to aggregate ( and license ) all that data |
| 06:18:51 | Schuyler: | he expresses concern over the possibility of mandatory licensing |
| 06:19:27 | Schuyler: | and about the risks of being too strident about the promotion of F/OSS as a philosophy |
| 06:20:00 | Schuyler: | as being potentially too alienating |
| 06:20:44 | Schuyler: | and finally Dave M is concerned about the risk of excessive overhead to particpate in the Foundation, in terms of complex rules etc |
| 06:20:54 | Schuyler: | hey, if I'm spamming the channel, tell me to stop |
| 06:21:06 | ominiverdi: | go on please |
| 06:21:08 | danmo: | no, please continue. we don't hear very well on the phone |
| 06:21:12 | : | * hobu is glad Schuyler is spamming the channel as he isn't so awake yet |
| 06:21:17 | gsherman: | good job Schuyler ! |
| 06:21:20 | Schuyler: | Perry Nacionales is emphasizing the importance of the Foundation as a vehicle for producing educational and marketing materials |
| 06:21:26 | steeler: | he's on fire, clicking next to me |
| 06:21:27 | Schuyler: | to promote our software projects |
| 06:21:57 | Schuyler: | Perry is also concerned about licensing conflicts |
| 06:22:27 | Schuyler: | he suggests ( as was discussed on the mailing list ) a fairly loose requirement for participating projects in terms of license -- OSI-approved etc |
| 06:22:47 | Schuyler: | finally, he wants the cost of membership to remain low |
| 06:23:46 | gsherman: | who is speaking now? |
| 06:23:49 | Schuyler: | Jon Scarbrough is describing the difference between tool builders and application builders |
| 06:23:54 | mpg: | I note that there are +50 different OSI licenses. ( wow ) |
| 06:24:10 | FrankW: | Jon Scarbrough - Wheretogetit |
| 06:24:16 | gsherman: | thx |
| 06:24:46 | Schuyler: | he's describing the conundrum of participating in the Foundation from the standpoint of a commercial application ( and *not* tool ) developer |
| 06:25:07 | Schuyler: | mpg: perhaps the Foundation can come up with its own approved subset : ) |
| 06:25:25 | gsherman: | standards are good -- everyone should have one |
| 06:25:26 | pramsey: | GPL or bust : ) |
| 06:25:32 | Schuyler: | Jon also thinks that outreach will be a crucial function of the Foundation |
| 06:25:33 | hobu: | :p |
| 06:25:38 | Schuyler: | pramsey: don't say that to FrankW : ) |
| 06:25:40 | FrankW: | pramsey: boo, his |
| 06:25:59 | mpg: | I think Jon is actually "where2getit" ( if you're trying to find the website )? |
| 06:26:02 | danmo: | GP what? |
| 06:26:07 | steeler: | GPeviL |
| 06:26:36 | Schuyler: | how much time is blocked out for this section of the meeting? |
| 06:26:51 | Schuyler: | we're only about a third of the way around the table |
| 06:26:55 | hobu: | I'll be quick |
| 06:27:35 | FrankW: | me too, I promise! |
| 06:27:44 | tiemann: | Hi! Michael Tiemann here |
| 06:27:50 | Schuyler: | Jon would like to see MapServer have the same kind of legitimacy in the marketplace as Apache et al |
| 06:27:55 | pramsey: | Hi Michael |
| 06:28:08 | brian_b: | I'll have some comments on branding and open source later at some point... |
| 06:28:12 | Schuyler: | he hopes the Foundation will raise awareness of the virtues of the foundation's projects |
| 06:28:19 | Schuyler: | Mercator! |
| 06:28:28 | Schuyler: | sorry... : ) |
| 06:28:32 | FrankW: | tiemann: the Michael Tiemann of Cygnus fame? |
| 06:28:37 | mpg: | +1 to Schuyler |
| 06:28:38 | gsherman: | get your fork out Schuyler : ) |
| 06:28:45 | tiemann: | FrankW: yep |
| 06:28:52 | brian_b: | hi Michael! |
| 06:29:02 | tiemann: | brian_b: Hallo! |
| 06:29:12 | markusN: | hi michael! |
| 06:29:28 | mpg: | Mark Lucas / OSSIM is up now |
| 06:30:00 | gsherman: | who's speaking now? |
| 06:30:06 | garylang_: | Mark Sherman |
| 06:30:13 | pramsey: | Mark Lucas |
| 06:30:15 | Schuyler: | Mark Lucas: "How do we make a living doing what we love?" |
| 06:30:15 | gsherman: | thx |
| 06:30:36 | Schuyler: | i.e. how does the business model for F/OSS developers work out |
| 06:30:48 | Schuyler: | "Software is no longer a product, it's a service." |
| 06:31:17 | Schuyler: | he hopes the Foundation will present a formal structure that they can deal with, that is comfortable to them |
| 06:31:29 | Schuyler: | they = customers, big corporations, government |
| 06:31:57 | AlainGrignon: | From the perspective of a client to MapServer, our perspective is that we will seek out the best possible source for developing what we need, more often than not that leads us to the originator of the code. |
| 06:32:06 | mpg: | editorial comment: SW-as-a-Service is not ( largely ) by itself a foundation to build a non-small company on |
| 06:32:10 | Schuyler: | to make the F/OSS business model more palatable to traditional business and government interests |
| 06:32:17 | tiemann: | don't forget academia. Seems like GRASS has benefitted much from new uses in research |
| 06:32:42 | markusN: | right |
| 06:33:19 | AlainGrignon: | My point is, if you produce good code, we'll seek you out to help us out. |
| 06:33:32 | brian_b: | I think most of the innovation in OS projects come from the non-business participants - they can be the most innovative, because they can take the greatest risks, because they have nothing to lose but their own time |
| 06:33:39 | AlainGrignon: | To me, that the FOSS business model. |
| 06:33:51 | Schuyler: | Mark also emphasizes the important of not antagonizing people stuck with proprietary software |
| 06:34:03 | mpg: | Actually, all this might be time well spent: everyone gets a chance to get all their favorite issues out on the table early in the day |
| 06:34:26 | Schuyler: | also, it will hopefully get faster if people are kind enough not to repeat each other too much : ) |
| 06:34:37 | mpg: | Tyler M. up now |
| 06:34:37 | tiemann: | here's a great URL that shows how CIOs think about value: http://www.redhat.com/f/pdf/sec/CIO_research5_1205.pdf |
| 06:34:45 | tiemann: | Forget that Red Hat is #1 in this survey. |
| 06:34:52 | tiemann: | Instead, look at the seven columns: |
| 06:34:57 | : | * Schuyler snorts |
| 06:35:06 | Schuyler: | er, sorry : ) |
| 06:35:13 | tiemann: | 1. Reduce Cost; 2 increase reveues; 3 solve business problems; 4 deliver ROI |
| 06:35:27 | Schuyler: | Tyler Mitchell is excited about the possibility of collaboration |
| 06:35:43 | garylang_: | tiemann - that's the user/customer benefit right? |
| 06:35:45 | tiemann: | 5. deliver on time/on budget; 6. be flexible and responsive; 7; deliver quality |
| 06:35:59 | tiemann: | 8: loyalty: given a choice, would you do business again? |
| 06:36:15 | tiemann: | garylang_: yes, but in a delineated fashion |
| 06:36:46 | tiemann: | What I like about this survey is that it gives FOSS folks a chance to build specific value cases |
| 06:36:55 | Schuyler: | it's funny that "solve business problems" is less important than "reduce cost" |
| 06:37:05 | tiemann: | What I also like is that it shows how amazingly vulnerable many prop SW players are |
| 06:37:18 | garylang_: | For a lot of people, reducing costs solve a big business problem |
| 06:37:41 | Schuyler: | Tyler emphasizes the importance of thoughtful mutual promotion |
| 06:37:41 | tiemann: | Schuyler: there's no value judgement about what more or less important in the survey, though I have my own opinions |
| 06:38:08 | Schuyler: | tiemann: oh, sorry : ) I misinterpreted your description of the columns as a ranked list |
| 06:38:30 | mpg: | ( Tyler makes snarky comment ) |
| 06:38:46 | Schuyler: | Tyler: "The Foundation represents for me a long term commitment to the community" |
| 06:38:54 | tiemann: | Let's face it: GRASS competition is highly concentrated. It's ESRI. |
| 06:39:01 | Schuyler: | a repository that will hold and use and maintain code over the long term |
| 06:39:16 | mpg: | Anyone from ESRI online? |
| 06:39:39 | mpg: | Apparently not... |
| 06:39:56 | pramsey: | I guess scott morehouse couldn't make the time : ) |
| 06:39:57 | Schuyler: | ah one very important thing Tyler has mentioned |
| 06:40:07 | AlainGrignon: | Alain Grignon = Natural Resources Canada ( Fed. Gov. ) |
| 06:40:10 | Schuyler: | is better collaboration between the C and Java stacks |
| 06:40:18 | mpg: | Tyler: user support as imp. as developer support |
| 06:40:18 | gsherman: | does a former esri count ? : ) |
| 06:40:41 | tiemann: | User support is VERY important! |
| 06:40:52 | Schuyler: | the G/FOSS C and Java development communities have had trouble with that historically |
| 06:41:03 | brian_b: | mmm, SWIG |
| 06:41:15 | mpg: | Alan Doyle / EOGEO up now |
| 06:41:20 | Schuyler: | Frank W: "A number of us have wanted to bridge that gap for a long time and maybe this is an opportunity to do that." |
| 06:41:33 | cholmes: | +1 |
| 06:41:41 | Schuyler: | yeah +! |
| 06:41:44 | Schuyler: | er, +1 |
| 06:41:46 | FrankW: | That damn FrankW is always speaking out of turn. |
| 06:42:03 | Schuyler: | Tyler's main concern was that the Foundation focus too much on developers and not enough on users. |
| 06:42:26 | tiemann: | Solved by having a User committee and a Developer committee? |
| 06:42:27 | Schuyler: | also, as Jon pointed out, our community includes several different types of developer -- tool builders and application builders |
| 06:43:00 | pramsey: | Yes, so what is a "member" of this foundation? |
| 06:43:01 | Schuyler: | Allan Doyle wants an organization that can build awareness and legitimacy of G/FOSS |
| 06:43:11 | tiemann: | One huge area for user support is the identification and preservation of access to data |
| 06:43:22 | pramsey: | A "member" of apache is a meritful person... a long term contributor? |
| 06:43:24 | mpg: | +1 open data portlas |
| 06:43:30 | Schuyler: | Ian Turton is concerned that a Foundation might compete for consultancy |
| 06:43:34 | mpg: | portlas |
| 06:43:39 | mpg: | portals - sorry |
| 06:44:09 | pramsey: | Even if the foundation does not compete for consultancy, the problem of referrals also exists. |
| 06:44:12 | Schuyler: | Daniel Brookshier is speaking |
| 06:44:17 | zool: | suggest rules about non-competing, co-operation |
| 06:44:20 | Schuyler: | he's the one to blame for this round of Q & A |
| 06:44:24 | mpg: | +1 Daniel, he originally mentioned the name "Mercator" I think |
| 06:44:30 | pramsey: | I am the foundation, and someone is asking me for a mapserver consultant. What do I do? |
| 06:44:44 | Schuyler: | hopefully brian_b can address that |
| 06:44:52 | tiemann: | The FSF maintained a list of all companies offering services in various areas. |
| 06:44:52 | danmo: | pramsey: you give my name ; ) |
| 06:45:00 | mpg: | Foundation could list "approved" consultants? |
| 06:45:01 | zool: | routing, not polling |
| 06:45:03 | brian_b: | Schuyler: yep, I'd be happy to |
| 06:45:05 | pramsey: | Yes, *all*, that's the problem. |
| 06:45:10 | tiemann: | They never "prefered" Cygnus, but with a little diligence on the part of the customer, they found us ;- ) |
| 06:45:30 | pramsey: | The PostgreSQL list of consultants, for example, includes companies who fund full time developers and companies that I have never even heard of. |
| 06:45:39 | adoyle: | OGC was going to do an "approved consulting company" thing many years ago but it never flew |
| 06:45:57 | tiemann: | The FSF stayed out of it by having a relatively low barrier. |
| 06:46:15 | brian_b: | if you'r a 501c3, you have to be very careful - you can't have "preferred" vendors just because you like them |
| 06:46:15 | pramsey: | But not all community members are created equal. Surely companies that directly fund development should be noted in some way. Part of the reciprocity equation. If I get nothing from funding development, why do so? |
| 06:46:19 | tiemann: | If you consider doing 100% honest GPL work a low barrier. |
| 06:46:23 | adoyle: | I think you either have to have a well-documented, fair process or don't do it |
| 06:46:29 | Schuyler: | Robert Bray is speaking now |
| 06:46:38 | : | * FrankW agrees with adoyle on that. |
| 06:46:55 | Schuyler: | he wants to see less "silo"-style development, more cross project collaboration |
| 06:47:01 | brian_b: | you can have a database of consultants, but you need a certification process if you want to separate the good ones from those who just show up. |
| 06:47:07 | Schuyler: | he doesn't want to see a SourceForge, where people just dump projects |
| 06:47:18 | hobu: | do people generally go around saying "find me a consultant to do x?" or do they figure out what x is, familiarize themselves with what specialties people/groups deal with, and go from there? |
| 06:47:22 | Schuyler: | but a place for healthy, living, well maintained and managed projects |
| 06:47:23 | adoyle: | brian_b - exactly. |
| 06:47:23 | iant_: | Paul don't you get a vibrabt community prooducing stuff for you to improve/extend? |
| 06:47:29 | pramsey: | I think for each company, some metrics would be very helpful. |
| 06:47:34 | iant_: | ( vibrant ) |
| 06:47:48 | : | * markusN agrees with Bob Bray |
| 06:47:53 | mpg: | Presumably a strong PSC keeps the "sourceforge dump" at bay? |
| 06:47:55 | pramsey: | Number of commits this year, last year, number of mails on the list, etc etc. |
| 06:48:10 | pramsey: | It is possible to measure "community involvement" in some coarse ways. |
| 06:48:14 | tiemann: | Actually, the eclipse foundation has worked this problem ( silos ) rather well |
| 06:48:31 | Schuyler: | well, the SF code dump has its uses -- sometimes a half-working solution that no one's touched in years is better than none at all |
| 06:48:36 | tiemann: | They have a committee that has a documented, high-bar process, and it seems to work. |
| 06:48:46 | pramsey: | iant_, I get a community w/o the foundation. If I move into the foundation, I submerge the brand attachment of my company with my projects. |
| 06:48:52 | brian_b: | pramsey: one important issue to figure out is whether the foundation is a collection of companies, or a collection of individuals - with Apache it's definitely the latter |
| 06:48:55 | tiemann: | Eclipse has grown into a real, really diverse, project |
| 06:49:05 | tiemann: | With eclipse it's the former |
| 06:49:13 | iant_: | paul - true |
| 06:49:19 | Schuyler: | Claude Phillipona wants to see a strong international composition to the Foundation |
| 06:49:26 | Schuyler: | +1 to that, BTW |
| 06:49:35 | tiemann: | Schuyler: you mean some US-based participation ;- ) |
| 06:49:44 | brian_b: | people are evaluated as individuals, who someone works for is almost entirely irrelevant. the only place it matters is in the incubator, where we don't want to graduate a project until no single employer "funds" more than half of the development |
| 06:49:58 | brian_b: | Eclipse is more of a corporate consortium - which is also why, IIRC, they're not a 501c3 |
| 06:50:21 | Schuyler: | Claude is also concerned about the Foundation becoming dependent on ADSK |
| 06:50:40 | tiemann: | Schuyler: ADSK? |
| 06:50:44 | brian_b: | autodesk |
| 06:51:54 | Schuyler: | Markus Neteler wants to see the Foundation help users understand which projects will solve their problems |
| 06:51:57 | pramsey: | on the "non SF" meme, I would love for "interoperability with other foundation projects" to be a part of foundation membership evaluation |
| 06:52:02 | Schuyler: | ( i.e. *not* the SF code dump again ) |
| 06:52:24 | mpg: | +1 pramsey |
| 06:52:25 | hobu: | pramsey: +1 |
| 06:52:29 | pramsey: | If the foundation could incubate a top to bottom geospatial stack ( and that means all the bits work together ) would be ohsogood |
| 06:52:36 | hobu: | requirement, even |
| 06:52:41 | brian_b: | The Apache incubator should really be looked at - it's not perfect, but it's got a couple requirements for graduation specifically targetted at avoiding the SF problem |
| 06:52:41 | mpg: | Also, *inter*-foundation projects..? |
| 06:52:41 | Schuyler: | Markus wants to see the Foundation be community driven -- so not dominated by a few people or a few companies or one or two large projects |
| 06:53:04 | garylang_: | Schuyller - you should go into journalism: very succinct and descriptive! |
| 06:53:04 | pramsey: | Hard, we are all small communities. |
| 06:53:06 | brian_b: | pramsey: +1 |
| 06:53:13 | Schuyler: | thx garylang_ : ) |
| 06:53:34 | pramsey: | Small communities => one primary actor |
| 06:53:36 | Schuyler: | Markus is emphasizing the enormous importance of data to GIS + cartography |
| 06:53:42 | Schuyler: | and how difficult data is to get outside the US |
| 06:53:45 | pramsey: | Either a company or original frenzied developer. |
| 06:53:53 | Schuyler: | because of licensing issues in most of the world |
| 06:53:56 | mpg: | top-to-bottom stack would be GREAT, but very hard to get everyone aligned -- woudl support effort, but skeptical of success |
| 06:54:11 | Schuyler: | he thinks that open access to data should be a strong political mission of the Foundation |
| 06:54:15 | Schuyler: | +1 to that |
| 06:54:22 | zool: | +N+1 |
| 06:54:27 | brian_b: | mpg: yep, Mozilla has that problem. |
| 06:54:34 | adoyle: | problem - US 501c3 orgs are limited in how much political lobbying they have to do |
| 06:54:37 | brian_b: | +1 to Markus, yes. |
| 06:54:44 | fk: | +1 for interop stack and data access |
| 06:54:55 | jack_e_chan: | +1 to Markus as well |
| 06:54:55 | mpg: | -1 to the term "*political* mission of Foundation" |
| 06:54:56 | adoyle: | s/have to/can/ |
| 06:54:58 | brian_b: | adoyle: it has to be a "nontrivial" amount, yes. |
| 06:55:15 | brian_b: | sorry, meant, it must NOT be a "nontrivial" amount |
| 06:55:16 | Schuyler: | Markus mentions the INSPIRE initiative before the EU Commission |
| 06:55:28 | tiemann: | FSF is against SWPAT and DRM. Doesn't hurt their 501( c )3 status |
| 06:55:28 | brian_b: | which is usually interpreted as <5% of expenses |
| 06:55:36 | : | * tiemann is away: I'm busy |
| 06:55:53 | adoyle: | I think there's a difference between broad positions and specific lobbying, so we may be ok |
| 06:56:22 | Schuyler: | INSPIRE = very restrictive geo data licensing polices standardized across all EU governments |
| 06:56:23 | brian_b: | writing position papers, and taking public positions on legislation, isn't considered "lobbying". visiting congresscritters in person or testifying to something in congress would be. |
| 06:56:46 | brian_b: | anyways, worth talking more about later |
| 06:57:52 | : | * nhv slinks in |
| 06:57:59 | markusN: | Inspire: http://mpa.itc.it/markus/papers/sdic_call_fossdi.pdf |
| 06:58:01 | Schuyler: | Markus wants to know how distributed, non-institutionalized communities can join the foundation |
| 06:58:08 | markusN: | This is our proposal: FOSSDI |
| 06:58:16 | Schuyler: | Ian: "How can organizations who are not legal entities join?" |
| 06:58:35 | Schuyler: | "but a bunch of developers that meet on IRC once a week" |
| 06:58:39 | pramsey: | As a bunch of individuals, under a Project. |
| 06:58:46 | Schuyler: | Ian represents the GeoTools project, BTW |
| 06:58:48 | pramsey: | That's an easy one. |
| 06:58:49 | markusN: | at INSPIRE site ( warning, no layout ): http://inspire.jrc.it/ir/sdic_view_step1_only.cfm?id=2163 |
| 06:58:51 | sigq: | Title: SDIC registration ( at inspire.jrc.it ) |
| 06:59:35 | iant_: | so does GeoTools have 20 votes to autodesks one?? |
| 06:59:52 | Schuyler: | Tom Burk wants to know whether joining the Foundation will help the MapServer users community |
| 07:00:06 | pramsey: | Right, iant_, which is the "individuals" vs "organziations" membership issue |
| 07:00:11 | mpg: | Individual member == "nonvoting associate" maybe? |
| 07:00:12 | pramsey: | Which I think is thorny. |
| 07:00:33 | iant_: | mpg so autodesk 1 vote getools none? |
| 07:01:06 | pramsey: | that's the corporate model. presumably in return for such an arrangement $$$ changes hands |
| 07:01:16 | iant_: | ah like OGC |
| 07:01:17 | brian_b: | Mozilla has a "corporate advisory board", for which companies donate six figure sums to be a part of. |
| 07:01:26 | mpg: | Well, not unless GeoTools is an "organization" ( am just thinking aloud, I do worry about disenfranchising folks ) |
| 07:01:27 | brian_b: | but there's no control in that board |
| 07:01:49 | pramsey: | Why do they do it, brian_b? |
| 07:01:53 | Schuyler: | Tom wants to see MapServer become easier to use and hopes the foundation will help provide better support for both first time and continuing users |
| 07:01:54 | iant_: | the problem for geotools is how to become an organisation |
| 07:01:55 | pramsey: | Seems like a poor investment. |
| 07:02:20 | mpg: | iant: I hear you... |
| 07:02:26 | Schuyler: | Rich Steele wants to see the foundation offer "clear management of intellectual property" |
| 07:02:49 | Schuyler: | this is important to some commercial customers |
| 07:03:04 | adoyle: | Why do people pay for more than an OGC TC membership? They must think they are getting something for their $? |
| 07:03:05 | FrankW: | I personally like the idea of corportations providing funding to the foundation, and getting some sort of non-binding opportunity to give input on direction. |
| 07:03:18 | mpg: | +1 to that |
| 07:03:19 | adoyle: | It's marketing, once you hit that level. |
| 07:03:25 | brian_b: | pramsey: because a couple of times a year they're all pulled into a room, given access to Brendan Eich and others who'll give a presentation on plans and direction, and then the sponsors can give their opinions on where things could go. there's no information given there that isn't otherwise public, but it's the face to face time with the lead developers that matters. That, plus PR benefit. Mozilla's model is very different from Apache since i |
| 07:03:50 | Schuyler: | Steve Lime is concerned that the membership requirements become not too onerous |
| 07:04:01 | adoyle: | Corporations can pay $ to be able to say they are "supporters" or "sponsors". They may not even need to have any specific ability to vote |
| 07:04:48 | adoyle: | brian_b - yes, give the big spenders something they may not be able to get elsewhere |
| 07:04:48 | iant_: | we could let them use a nice icon for thier web site |
| 07:04:51 | brian_b: | ( btw, I'm also a board member at the Mozilla Foundation, so I can provide some ideas from there as well ) |
| 07:05:04 | adoyle: | A day with Steve Lime! |
| 07:05:07 | adoyle: | $50K |
| 07:05:13 | FrankW: | lol |
| 07:05:13 | Schuyler: | +1 adoyle |
| 07:05:21 | brian_b: | +1! |
| 07:05:39 | brian_b: | put him on ebay to ensure the best price |
| 07:05:41 | Schuyler: | Steve expresses strong concern about the loss of project autonomy |
| 07:06:46 | FrankW: | ie. he doesn't want a foundation throwing away all the work on the web site because it doesn't meet some foundation spec. |
| 07:07:40 | Schuyler: | he seems to be asserting the idea that the foundation should be there to provide various kinds of infrastructure, to make it easier to collaborate |
| 07:07:56 | nhv: | SLime ++ |
| 07:07:58 | Schuyler: | but the amount of work needed in writing code and documentation and so on isn't going to decrease : ) |
| 07:08:16 | mpg: | Schuyler is up |
| 07:08:19 | garylang_: | Schuyler can't type because he is talking |
| 07:08:21 | danmo: | TylerM's pics are up on the foundation server at: http://www1.mapserverfoundation.org/chicago-pics/ ( not linked from anywhere on the site ) |
| 07:08:22 | sigq: | Title: Image Gallery for OSGeoSpatial Foundation Chicago Meeting - Feb 4th, 2006 ( at www1.mapserverfoundation.org ) |
| 07:08:42 | TylerM: | Please use that site instead now for the picxs |
| 07:10:03 | garylang_: | Schuyler expresses concern that small projects lose autonomy |
| 07:10:39 | TylerM: | and that scope beyond american needs can really help international uptake.. |
| 07:10:57 | TylerM: | particularly with geodata collection projects |
| 07:11:02 | Schuyler: | the three things I said were ( 1 ) the Foundation needs to make an effort to be explicitly international ( 2 ) the Foundation should support efforts to open data access outside the US and ( iii ) the Foundation needs to find a way to embrace development communities of all sizes |
| 07:11:11 | gsherman: | can't really hear howard ( at least i think thats who's speaking |
| 07:11:20 | mpg: | FrankW is up |
| 07:11:26 | TylerM: | The dictator speaks |
| 07:11:34 | mpg: | What is "goodle"? :- ) |
| 07:11:35 | Schuyler: | however, I missed what Howard said... hey hobu you want to sum up? |
| 07:11:40 | Schuyler: | goodle = GDAL |
| 07:11:53 | TylerM: | as in http://gdal.org |
| 07:11:54 | sigq: | Title: HTML REDIRECT ( at gdal.org ) |
| 07:11:54 | mpg: | Only Frank pronounces it that way |
| 07:12:02 | gsherman: | what? its not geee-doll? |
| 07:12:05 | brian_b: | heh, I thought he said Google |
| 07:12:17 | hobu: | how does a project make it into the foundation after it has been founded.... make sure we focus on commonalities between *all* projects. make sure the foundation is sustainable, long-lasting, and vibrant. |
| 07:12:20 | mpg: | Frank != crazy guy in bushes |
| 07:12:21 | Schuyler: | Frank Warmerdam wants to build turn his dictatorially run project into something more community focused, something that might outlive him if he were to wander away |
| 07:12:30 | gsherman: | hobu, thanks |
| 07:12:46 | Schuyler: | gsherman: yeah, I pronounced it gee-dol for the longest time |
| 07:12:50 | TylerM: | 'wander away' = hit by bus |
| 07:12:57 | Schuyler: | also, it's apparently O-G-R, not ogre |
| 07:13:10 | hobu: | oh gee arh |
| 07:13:17 | Schuyler: | TylerM: shush. "wander away" = "win lottery and retire to remote tropical island" |
| 07:13:19 | markusN: | gdäl |
| 07:13:25 | markusN: | geedäl, sorry |
| 07:13:35 | markusN: | :- ) |
| 07:13:38 | : | * _brad_ nods to markusN |
| 07:13:41 | garylang_: | It's like Jah-va |
| 07:13:48 | garylang_: | Or ja-va |
| 07:13:49 | Schuyler: | what was that last bit that Frank said about funding structure? |
| 07:14:07 | garylang_: | Little projects have funding difficulties - is what I heard |
| 07:14:20 | iant_: | funding for maintanence |
| 07:14:21 | FrankW: | I said I want a mechanism to bring funding to nittygritty maintenance of the various projects. |
| 07:14:46 | Schuyler: | Michael Gerlek wants to see a legal framework for submitting code to the foundation, which is important to his company |
| 07:14:49 | jmckenna: | ( enjoying the pics haha ) |
| 07:15:16 | Schuyler: | Michael: "If Frank *did* get hit by a bus, my life would become extremely difficult for several months" -- he wants to see the foundation provide more continuity for projects |
| 07:15:19 | zool: | that sounded like FrankW said, "to bring fun to nittygritty maintenance", i liked that better ; ) |
| 07:15:27 | FrankW: | lol |
| 07:15:29 | camerons: | Hello, I'm awake and am contactable for questions to Mapbuilder for the next 4 hours or so. |
| 07:15:43 | Schuyler: | camerons: I gave you guys a shout out |
| 07:15:49 | brian_b: | MichaelG for U.S. Prez! |
| 07:16:03 | Schuyler: | I've just missed like half of Michael's points |
| 07:16:22 | Schuyler: | he's afraid that the Foundation might become too religious about licenses |
| 07:16:23 | camerons: | Thanks Schuyler. |
| 07:17:06 | Schuyler: | and he's interested to see ( but dubious ) the Foundation work on producing a top-to-bottom stack |
| 07:17:07 | mpg: | Schuyler: Sorry I spoke to fast |
| 07:18:00 | jack_e_chan: | Arnulf: Warmerdemocratic! |
| 07:18:06 | Schuyler: | Arnulf Christl wants to see more and better communication between projects, more transparency for business and a transition from "Warmerdamocratic" to actually democratic |
| 07:18:38 | Schuyler: | Arnulf wants to promote the idea of Free Software and reminds us that it's not at all incompatible with commerce |
| 07:18:44 | gsherman: | i'm seeing a trend in the comments towards "grand unification" |
| 07:18:50 | Schuyler: | also, I think he mentioned open data access as well |
| 07:18:56 | garylang_: | gsherman - say more? |
| 07:18:59 | mpg: | LizardTech points: ( 1 ) be open to commercial interests; ( 2 ) worries about IP issues; ( 3 ) would like input into OS tools we rely on; ( 4 ) want forum to standards and interop tools; ( 5 ) open data portals good, political agenda scary; ( 6 ) top-bottom stack idea good, but hard |
| 07:19:04 | Schuyler: | thanks mpg : ) |
| 07:19:08 | TylerM: | arnulf confesses evil tendencies |
| 07:19:12 | gsherman: | a top-to-bottom stack was mentioned |
| 07:19:15 | zool: | now i want to build a warmerdamocrat party machine |
| 07:19:26 | mpg: | FrankW for VP! |
| 07:19:34 | Schuyler: | as in a machine that throws parties? |
| 07:19:39 | gsherman: | basically it brings up the issue of "competing" projects in the foundation |
| 07:19:54 | Schuyler: | that sounds like putting the fun back into nittygritty maintenance |
| 07:19:56 | mapslob_home: | excellent point |
| 07:20:14 | mapslob_home: | excellent point gary ( I mean ) |
| 07:20:34 | Schuyler: | hey pramsey could you summarize your concerns for the channel |
| 07:20:38 | TylerM: | 10 minute break |
| 07:20:43 | FrankW: | gsherman: well, we certainly face competing projects off the start with Tux and MapServer. |
| 07:20:49 | TylerM: | +5 more for the smokers : ) |
| 07:20:52 | camerons: | Has anyone set up a Skype conference that I can log into? |
| 07:20:53 | FrankW: | So we clearly need to be able to handle it. |
| 07:21:05 | pramsey: | Concerns: being "the source" for our projects is a huge benefit... does joining the foundation reduce that benefit? |
| 07:21:06 | gsherman: | right, but if a goal of the foundation is to create a "stack" for users |
| 07:21:12 | gsherman: | then its a problem |
| 07:21:19 | Schuyler: | camerons: I *think* the Skype conf may have foundered for technical reasons |
| 07:21:19 | FrankW: | Right |
| 07:21:21 | garylang_: | camerons - couldn't figure out how to do it. |
| 07:21:24 | TylerM: | camerons: no skype - we don't really have a mic |
| 07:21:36 | garylang_: | Diid you get thte phone #? |
| 07:21:37 | FrankW: | I don't think we can take this stack thing in too exclusive a way. |
| 07:21:44 | camerons: | No problem, I'll stick with IRC. |
| 07:21:48 | TylerM: | someone who has skype 'out' could conference into the 1800 number and that act as a gateway/conference for others : ) |
| 07:21:56 | pramsey: | PostGIS is at postgis.refractions.net, we provide 95% of the development effort, part of our return is the clear attachment of hte project to us. |
| 07:22:33 | nhv: | coul dsomeone on the floor give us a quick overview on twhat if any has been decided so far please |
| 07:22:37 | camerons: | Gary, phone is too expensive from Australia for me, I'll stick with IRC. |
| 07:23:01 | garylang_: | camerons - understood |
| 07:23:09 | gsherman: | reminder: logs are at logs.qgis.org/geofoundation |
| 07:23:12 | garylang_: | we're lucky to have the wi-fi setup we have. |
| 07:23:14 | mapslob_home: | at this point the only decision is a name OSGF ( OSGEO.ORG ) |
| 07:23:36 | nhv: | thanks steve |
| 07:23:59 | danmo: | Thinking outloud, the name that's been picked is "Open Source GeoSpatial Foundation" ... there is no mention of "free" in the name, I'm surprised we didn't hear any comment about this from the more FSF-focused people |
| 07:24:00 | garylang_: | IRC folks - raise your hand if you aren't here - a lot of posters are actually here |
| 07:24:10 | garylang_: | danmo - at home |
| 07:24:14 | garylang_: | camerons - in AUS |
| 07:24:21 | garylang_: | Seang not here |
| 07:24:23 | danmo: | danmo: Daniel Morissette |
| 07:24:25 | : | * nhv on IRC |
| 07:24:27 | garylang_: | who else is actively listning |
| 07:24:34 | : | * nhv Norman Vine |
| 07:24:35 | : | * gsherman listening |
| 07:24:40 | camerons: | here |
| 07:24:41 | mapslob_home: | ( dan ) arnulf made a little effort, but nothing major |
| 07:24:43 | jmckenna: | here |
| 07:25:07 | danmo: | mapslob_home: if everybody's happy then that's great! |
| 07:25:17 | zjames: | here |
| 07:25:33 | mapslob_home: | dan, it was probably 20-5, perhaps higher |
| 07:26:09 | danmo: | TylerM: we need more pics |
| 07:26:17 | garylang_: | When people come back from bio-breaks, we want to start taking input from IRC |
| 07:26:24 | garylang_: | Framing questions were in teh pre-work |
| 07:26:33 | garylang_: | 1 ) What are the benefits of the foundation from your POV |
| 07:26:39 | mapslob_home: | gsherman, please bring up the competition issue |
| 07:26:49 | garylang_: | 2 ) What concerns do you have about it that would prevent supporting it? |
| 07:27:03 | garylang_: | I actually have gsherman's here up on the projector |
| 07:27:49 | gsherman: | hi JamesFee - Log of todays events is at http://logs.qgis.org/geofoundation |
| 07:27:50 | sigq: | Title: Index of /geofoundation ( at logs.qgis.org ) |
| 07:28:11 | : | * JamesFee just woke up Its too early :( |
| 07:28:26 | gsherman: | i'v been up since 4:00am local : ) |
| 07:28:48 | gsherman: | meeting is currently on break until about 35 minutes after the hour |
| 07:28:54 | JamesFee: | thanks |
| 07:31:10 | zool: | skype is super-sub-optimal. what about icecast? |
| 07:31:40 | zool: | or i bet there is some Trendy Mac Thing that would do the job too |
| 07:32:13 | gsherman: | mac? whats that? : ) |
| 07:33:11 | zool: | istr Tyler is a mac-head |
| 07:33:28 | gsherman: | i notice from the pics there are a number of macs there |
| 07:33:30 | nhv: | Mark Luxcas is |
| 07:33:40 | gsherman: | maybe we should divide up based on OS |
| 07:33:49 | zool: | technology religious wars sigh |
| 07:34:03 | : | * gsherman has not interest in such wars, just being a troll : ) |
| 07:34:40 | Schuyler: | ha |
| 07:34:48 | Schuyler: | I wonder how many people there are here with Linux on their desktop |
| 07:35:13 | gsherman: | is there anybody at the table *without* a laptop? |
| 07:36:32 | zool: | http://www.gnuware.com/icecast/unofficial/index.html |
| 07:36:37 | sigq: | Title: The Unofficial Icecast HowTo ( at www.gnuware.com ) |
| 07:37:31 | : | * gsherman wonders how long the batteries in the cordless phone wil last... |
| 07:41:07 | gsherman: | it appears they are having network issues in the meeting room |
| 07:43:17 | FrankW: | Gary rebooted the, er, network thingy. All better now. |
| 07:43:51 | Schuyler: | Gary Lang is playing Zappa's "Montana" |
| 07:44:07 | Schuyler: | "I might be moving to Montana soon, to raise me up a crop of dental FLOSS" |
| 07:44:13 | camerons: | Schuyler, If I'm not responding, try pinging my IM client. My IRC client doesn't have sound enabled ( it's on an old computer ). |
| 07:45:50 | FrankW: | Gary is reading gshermans concerns. |
| 07:46:29 | TylerM: | Gary Lang is reading out Gary Sherman's comments/pre-work notes |
| 07:47:14 | Schuyler: | I'm tempted to reel them off here |
| 07:47:20 | Schuyler: | but they're all things that have been mentioned before |
| 07:47:26 | Schuyler: | except the portal idea |
| 07:47:28 | gsherman: | sounds good |
| 07:47:37 | gsherman: | i mean no need to repeat |
| 07:47:38 | Schuyler: | hosted SVN + Trac etc |
| 07:48:01 | Schuyler: | so |
| 07:48:08 | Schuyler: | Gary is calling for questions from IRC |
| 07:48:29 | Schuyler: | Would anyone like to answer the question about benefits and concerns on joining the Foundation? |
| 07:48:38 | Schuyler: | hey nhv |
| 07:48:46 | garylang: | nhv - list your benefits |
| 07:48:55 | turbogeek: | FYI the portal is SVN and Project Tracker or Issue Tracker ( derived from Bugzilla ) |
| 07:49:11 | Schuyler: | which portal is this? |
| 07:49:15 | garylang: | Norman |
| 07:49:19 | garylang: | We're all sitting here |
| 07:49:26 | turbogeek: | The portal that Autodesk is funding |
| 07:49:26 | camerons: | Mapbuilder concerns: |
| 07:49:27 | camerons: | Licence: We don't want to assign copywrite to the Foundation and allow the Foudnation to dual licence for commercial gain. |
| 07:49:27 | camerons: | Control: We want our PMC to negotiate financial details with sponsors. Ie: what functionality is written, and who we pay to do the work. ( A sponsor might be the Foundation ). |
| 07:49:27 | camerons: | Control: We want our PMC to decide who is on our board. If the Foundation is to assign a member to our board ( who isn't already on the board ) then the Foudnation member would join as a non-voting member. |
| 07:50:08 | Schuyler: | ok Cameron, Gary is reading off these concerns to the meeting |
| 07:50:21 | turbogeek: | The portal is the same software as Openoffice.org and many others |
| 07:50:24 | Schuyler: | concern over the "MySQL model" |
| 07:50:25 | TylerM: | camerons: are you also on the phone? |
| 07:50:39 | camerons: | TylerN, no, just irc. |
| 07:52:20 | garylang: | Schulyer - he's in AUS - too expensive to diall in |
| 07:52:33 | garylang: | camerons - we are discussing your concerns - I have them on the projector |
| 07:53:05 | camerons: | Benefits to Mapbuilder: |
| 07:53:05 | camerons: | Marketing, brand recognition, legal protection, lobbying as part of a Free Open Source movement, processing funds as part of a Charitable Org. |
| 07:54:05 | Schuyler: | okay, we are discussing the funding issue |
| 07:54:10 | Schuyler: | Brian B is providing some answers |
| 07:54:21 | Schuyler: | can the foundation accept funds on behalf of a project? |
| 07:54:32 | Schuyler: | can those funds be accepted for work on spec, or only as a general contribution? |
| 07:54:35 | Schuyler: | hey nhv |
| 07:54:37 | Schuyler: | welcome back |
| 07:54:47 | Schuyler: | we are having an IRC discussion phase |
| 07:55:22 | : | * tiemann is back ( gone 00:59:46 ) |
| 07:55:40 | nhv: | :- ) |
| 07:55:42 | : | * nhv content lurking |
| 07:55:43 | Schuyler: | there are a number of financial constraints and benefits to the Foundation becoming a 501c3 |
| 07:55:57 | Schuyler: | brian_b: I hope you'll summarize those for the channel : ) |
| 07:56:49 | Schuyler: | with a 501c3, the Foundation is limited in its possible activities but can accept tax free donation |
| 07:57:33 | Schuyler: | with a 501c6, the Foundation is more of a trade association -- not tax deductible |
| 07:57:47 | Schuyler: | John Weathersby says it's more important to figure out what we want to do, and then pick the legal structure |
| 07:57:50 | Schuyler: | rather than the other way around |
| 07:57:53 | camerons: | Can the tax free donation be used to pay developers from participating projects? |
| 07:58:00 | Schuyler: | camerons: this is how the subject came up : ) |
| 07:58:10 | camerons: | : ) |
| 07:58:36 | Schuyler: | the idea seems to be that businesses can deduct expenses anyway, so the benefit would primarily be to individual contributors |
| 07:59:01 | Schuyler: | the way in which being a charitable non-profit might bind the Foundation from possible courses of action is a concern |
| 07:59:10 | garylang_: | jmckenna do you have your lits and benefits ready? |
| 07:59:48 | uchoa: | About the commercial model to fundation: We ( OpenGEO - Brazil Company ) have a suggestion to explain. If the foundation make a certification ( like as LPI - Linux Professional Institute ) to FOSS GIS Projects, maybe don't have to make a high cost to associated member, because the certification will make money. |
| 07:59:57 | Schuyler: | Brian B is relating the decision process made by the Apache Software Foundation to become a charitable non-profit |
| 08:00:12 | camerons: | What are the limiations being a charitable organisation? |
| 08:00:31 | danmo: | I'll send mine in 30 secs |
| 08:00:38 | camerons: | ( If that doesn't take too long to answer ) |
| 08:00:39 | brian_b: | I'm trying to think about how to summarize |
| 08:00:46 | FrankW: | uchoa: I would be concerned about seeing certification seen as a revenue source ( beyond paying the cost of certification ). |
| 08:01:04 | tiemann: | FrankW: I agree--certification alone is weak. |
| 08:01:18 | markusN: | FrankW: good point |
| 08:01:30 | brian_b: | camerons: there are many, but the major ones I can think of are around funding, IRS reporting requirements, and that you will be judged by the IRS on whether you meet your public benefit mission |
| 08:02:03 | Schuyler: | Daniel Brookshier notes that certification is a major source of revenue for the OMG ( Object Modeling Group? ) |
| 08:02:13 | mpg_: | I missed something -- what exactly are we certifying? |
| 08:02:20 | garylang_: | camerons - charitable concern: we will take that up during hte breakout.. I captured it here |
| 08:02:24 | Schuyler: | mpg_: certification of professional expertise |
| 08:02:27 | Schuyler: | I assume |
| 08:02:28 | gsherman: | i would like to see some discussion about the competition issue, either now or in the breakout groups |
| 08:02:41 | danmo: | My list is at http://rafb.net/paste/results/8qQoLX21.html |
| 08:02:44 | camerons: | Is the "Charitiable" status international? Can countries like Australia, England also get tax exemptions? |
| 08:02:54 | TylerM: | ok, just a sec. discussing certification stuff brought up by uchoa |
| 08:03:01 | Schuyler: | camerons: probably depends on international treaty. |
| 08:03:19 | mpg_: | -1 to test suite certification ( at least in the near term ) |
| 08:03:22 | brian_b: | camerons: I am not sure whether doners in foreign countries can take a tax writeoff on their own taxes for donations made to U.S. 501c3 organizations - I've not heard either way. |
| 08:04:03 | garylang_: | danmo - bringing it up now |
| 08:04:07 | markusN: | mpg_: test suite certification or software certification against test suite? |
| 08:04:09 | tiemann: | I tried to give money to the R project ( in Austria ) and there's no tax-free way to do so. They didn't want to bother creating a US 501( c )3. I think it's an unsolved problem ( to do international tax free ). Orgs like WWF have US-based entities for US tax free and global for others. |
| 08:04:23 | pramsey_: | gsherman, could you elabourate on the "competition issue" ? |
| 08:04:41 | camerons: | Charitable status in other countries would be a major benefit - especially for European countries. |
| 08:04:45 | brian_b: | tiemann: that makes sense, i've heard of people in Apache talking about creating local subs to take local tax benefits. |
| 08:05:27 | gsherman: | pramsey_, Some have mentioned that the foundation should work towards creating a "suite" if you will of tools/software. I interpret this ( right or wrong ) to indicate some sort of endorsement of specific projects over others. |
| 08:05:28 | markusN: | tiemann: we need sort of nationally registered sub-organizations |
| 08:05:29 | garylang_: | 123456789 Main concerns: ( 1 ) code submitted to the foundation has to remain free, i.e. cannot in any way be relicensed as a non-OSI approved license ( 2 ) Foundation should be light-weight to not be dependant on funding of large sponsors ( and not be subject to large sponsors controlling too much )( 3 ) projects need to maintain their autonomy ( i.e. each project's PSC has full control on how its... |
| 08:05:30 | FrankW: | we are reviewing danmo's pints now. |
| 08:05:31 | garylang_: | ...project is run )Benefits:( 1 ) Community management and coordination, material for promotion of osgeo software and ideas at conferences, etc.( 2 ) Infrastructure for projects ( website, lists, CVS, etc. )( 3 ) Legal protection for the code and the developers( 4 ) Members of more mature projects can provide guidance/mentiorship for newer projects |
| 08:05:34 | gsherman: | Thus potentially limiting membership |
| 08:05:53 | brian_b: | One important thing about Apache is that raising money was never a goal - this is for better and for worse |
| 08:06:15 | pramsey_: | gsherman, yes, that would be the necessary countervail, but since we are already talking about tux and mapserver as early members, I fear that horse is out of hte door |
| 08:06:16 | gsherman: | pramsey_, So to hit closer to home, are uDig and QGIS competitors? : ) |
| 08:06:26 | Schuyler: | this is danmo's lists of concerns we're looking at now |
| 08:06:29 | pramsey_: | obviously for marketing reasons, having one king to rule them all is preferable. |
| 08:06:31 | danmo: | yup |
| 08:06:34 | nhv: | discussion on danmo concern ( 1 ) IMO license should be allowed to remain with the submitting project if project desires |
| 08:06:40 | pramsey_: | gsherman, yes, they are. |
| 08:06:40 | danmo: | no, didn't hear the question |
| 08:06:54 | danmo: | barely |
| 08:06:55 | pramsey_: | for users, though less for developers, due to the language difference |
| 08:07:40 | Schuyler: | danmo: where you said "the code submitted to the foundation has to remain free", did you mean no relicensing at all or just no relicensing outside OSI-approved lcienses? |
| 08:07:45 | danmo: | my main concern is that someone cannot hijack the foundation and walk away with the code |
| 08:07:55 | brian_b: | yep |
| 08:08:09 | danmo: | whether it can be relicensed or not, I'm not sure I care too much |
| 08:08:13 | Schuyler: | OSI-based relicensing is OK? |
| 08:08:20 | danmo: | yup, I'd think so |
| 08:08:21 | Schuyler: | Chris Holmes says that WOULD be a concern for GPL projects |
| 08:08:54 | Schuyler: | John Weathersby says that co-ownership of copyright is an option |
| 08:08:59 | mpg_: | now discussion copyright ownership |
| 08:09:14 | Schuyler: | Brian B says that Apache doesn't even own all copyright in Apache, just agreements that everything they submit is freely redistributable |
| 08:09:15 | tiemann: | Many non-profits have a clause that says "in the event of liquidation, assets may only be transferred to other non-profits". This is the case of a local Montessori school. |
| 08:09:30 | mpg_: | ( +1 Montessori ) |
| 08:09:31 | adoyle_: | all non-profits must have that clause |
| 08:09:32 | tiemann: | Thus, I think the hijack problem can be solved by naming the FSF or other entity as the repository |
| 08:09:44 | adoyle_: | It's the "dissolution clause" and you don't get 501c3 w/o it |
| 08:09:48 | tiemann: | ...of last resort. |
| 08:09:57 | camerons: | "not being able to relicence" is a common concern of OS developers and has the potential to prevent developers from joining a project. |
| 08:10:21 | markusN: | tiemann: in Germany there is the tax-exempt GRASS Anwender-Vereinigung e.V. http://www.grass-verein.de which could be linked to the foundation |
| 08:10:23 | sigq: | Title: GRASS Anwender-Vereinigung e.V.: Hauptseite ( at www.grass-verein.de ) |
| 08:11:16 | Schuyler: | Brian B cites the example of Linux, which is licensed GPL v2 and not "GPL v2 or better" |
| 08:11:23 | Schuyler: | because Linus didn't entirely trust the FSF |
| 08:11:47 | Schuyler: | the downside is that Linux is GPL v2 now and forever because getting approval to change copyright from thousands of code submitters would be next to impossible |
| 08:11:59 | Schuyler: | so if the GPL 2 turns out to someday be inadequate... what then? |
| 08:13:14 | zool: | gpl3, drm, ogc, spatial data protectionism rant: http://mappinghacks.com/index.cgi/2006/01/17#spatial_drm |
| 08:13:19 | sigq: | Title: Mapping Hacks ( at mappinghacks.com ) |
| 08:13:23 | zool: | ( not wanting to muddy waters, just tweaked my mind ) |
| 08:13:30 | : | * zool shush |
| 08:13:40 | adoyle_: | I would like to hear from our legal expert( s ) how legal protection would work. Also, how much will the legal protection cost? Legal protection seems to be a common thread of what people want |
| 08:13:42 | mpg_: | Schuyler notes we ar enot Apache, as we have many disparate projects ab initio |
| 08:13:47 | pramsey_: | schuyler is saying that this foundation, unlike apache, has a large number of pre-existing projects |
| 08:13:48 | brian_b: | Schuyler: says we might need to be more flexible on licensing since this is a collection of different existing projects coming together |
| 08:13:52 | camerons: | A commitment to only relicence to OSI licences would probably be acceptable to most programmers. It is the selling of source code that a developer has given away for free which is the big issue. |
| 08:14:21 | zool: | code+data look less different |
| 08:14:36 | Schuyler: | I think that the Foundation will have to make different decisions for different projects |
| 08:14:47 | Schuyler: | but Gary points out that it will be good for us all to decide ahead of time what we don't want |
| 08:15:04 | brian_b: | Schuyler: standardization has benefits, too |
| 08:15:04 | Schuyler: | i.e. no non-OSI-approved licenses for Foundation affiliated projects |
| 08:15:16 | brian_b: | cross-project collaboration is easier when both are using the same license for example |
| 08:15:22 | Schuyler: | yeah no kidding. |
| 08:15:31 | Schuyler: | and that IS a stated goal as well. |
| 08:16:33 | adoyle: | All projects that want to cross-project collaborate: go into a corner and agree on a license |
| 08:16:49 | danmo: | adoyle: that might be the best option |
| 08:16:50 | brian_b: | adoyle: maybe, but sometimes you don't know ahead of time |
| 08:16:57 | Schuyler: | speaking as a representative of MapServer, Steve Lime wants to see a "joinable" Foundation emerge from this meeting |
| 08:17:07 | Schuyler: | the competition issue is one possible block to that |
| 08:17:15 | turbogeek: | I'm ready to add 10+licenses to all my open source |
| 08:17:20 | : | * nhv doesn't want to see a requirement to turn over ownership/copyright of code to foundation eg Foundation is a federation not a kingdom |
| 08:17:30 | adoyle: | right nhv |
| 08:17:30 | brian_b: | turbogeek: might as well MIT license it then, so everyone can use it : ) |
| 08:17:45 | mpg_: | adoyle: what is A wants to cross-collab with B and C, and license( B ) != license( C ), etc... |
| 08:17:50 | markusN: | nhv: in the GRASS case ( also GDAL AFAIK ) it's even impossible |
| 08:17:53 | Schuyler: | he notes that several existing projects ( MapServer, GeoServer, MapGuide ) have similar functions |
| 08:18:13 | Schuyler: | how does the Foundation avoid the semblance of favoritism, esp if it's trying to build a top-to-bottom stack offering |
| 08:18:17 | FrankW: | markusN: Right, so it is clear assignment will not be required. |
| 08:18:35 | Schuyler: | yeah, it should be an option, but not a requirement |
| 08:18:35 | adoyle: | But the big Q in my mind is "what can the foundation do that can not currently be done". I think the answer is "legal protection". I want to hear more about legal protection |
| 08:18:40 | nhv: | although assignment should be possible |
| 08:18:46 | turbogeek: | MIT lic does have the least evil |
| 08:18:59 | danmo: | I agree that assignment should not be an absolute requirement |
| 08:19:18 | Schuyler: | turbogeek: that's not what Stallman would say : ) |
| 08:19:22 | tiemann: | danmo: there may be a positive network effect if assignment is possible and confers benefits |
| 08:19:31 | brian_b: | turbogeek: it also has the least protection |
| 08:19:53 | danmo: | tiemann: agreed, but if that's an absolute requirement then that's excluding many key projects |
| 08:20:02 | nhv: | it might be that legal protection can only be offered for code that as been assigned to foundation |
| 08:20:05 | pramsey_: | adoyle, same question for me. What is the big net positive from a foundation. |
| 08:20:10 | Schuyler: | Arnulf is downplaying the code hijack issue |
| 08:20:20 | brookshier: | That assumes external evil :o ) |
| 08:20:20 | danmo: | nhv: very possible |
| 08:20:32 | pramsey_: | Legal is a straightforward obvious one. The rest are more nebulous thus far. |
| 08:20:38 | adoyle: | right |
| 08:21:52 | pramsey_: | Having all the software under one "roof" is also "nice", but would be even better if there was a story about "here is how to build from the parts". The stack idea. Or an interoperability requirement, so the parts all fit together optimally. |
| 08:21:54 | brookshier: | The key I've seen in the past few years is not the lic, but the contributor agreement |
| 08:22:09 | garylang_: | Any other IRC input - Benefits/concerns. Going once.... |
| 08:22:10 | fk: | top-to-bottom-stack: the foundation could outline the concept of a modular stack where one can choose between different projects for one module |
| 08:22:19 | zool: | garylang yes |
| 08:22:24 | zool: | collaborative documentation repos |
| 08:22:42 | zool: | way to provide people with means to make intelligent choices about what projects fit their needs |
| 08:22:52 | zool: | this happense elsewhere anyway |
| 08:22:57 | nhv: | brookshier interesting pont can you expand on the contributor agreement concept |
| 08:22:59 | zool: | wouldnt nesc involve backing funding |
| 08:23:07 | tiemann: | fk: /me notes that Fedora is a kind of modular stack, one that incorporates many types of licenses, all governed by contributor agreements. However, we've stalled on defining the Foundation ( sigh ). |
| 08:23:12 | zool: | but osgeo would be a good neutral grounds place for that sort of thing to live. |
| 08:23:22 | mpg_: | mpg says let a thousand ( OSI-approved ) licenses bloom. |
| 08:23:35 | tiemann: | mpg: tiemann says "noooooo!!!!!!" |
| 08:23:43 | brian_b: | hahahaha |
| 08:23:44 | : | * FrankW agrees with tiemann |
| 08:23:55 | zool: | license is a kind of documentation issue - self description - plans for the future - statement of intent |
| 08:23:55 | FrankW: | Moving to next agenda item. |
| 08:23:57 | : | * brian_b submits the "Open Geospatial Software License" to OSI |
| 08:23:59 | Schuyler: | zool: that is a definite potential purpose for the foundation that has been noted |
| 08:24:07 | : | * mpg_ hides under table |
| 08:24:19 | zool: | okay i will go back to my domestic activities then ;P |
| 08:24:25 | Schuyler: | how the Foundation can provide a single place in which people can figure out what's out there, much less how to use it : ) |
| 08:24:35 | zool: | sorry, not completely in sync with what's being discussed when |
| 08:24:53 | mpg_: | we're now summarizing goals/benefits |
| 08:25:08 | nhv: | please post synopsis |
| 08:25:16 | Schuyler: | zool: it's something people want to see : ) so not controversial |
| 08:25:25 | Schuyler: | ( unlike, say, licensing ) |
| 08:25:34 | Schuyler: | OK |
| 08:25:37 | adoyle: | someone take pictures of the flipcharts & post them! |
| 08:25:45 | zool: | doesnt that say, "focus on building a foundation from the things that aren't controversial" quite clearly? ; ) |
| 08:25:57 | nhv: | zool++ |
| 08:25:58 | : | * zool hides |
| 08:26:19 | Schuyler: | Summarized benefits: Legal framework, outreach, promotion, cross-project collaboration, user support, reference implementations, certification, infrastructure |
| 08:26:36 | Schuyler: | zool: well put : ) |
| 08:26:45 | tiemann: | plus: funding model? |
| 08:26:59 | Schuyler: | tiemann: good call |
| 08:27:45 | danmo: | can someone please move the mic closer to Gary? |
| 08:27:59 | camerons: | I'd like to add "lobbying" for OS GIS to political bodies to the benifits. |
| 08:28:10 | danmo: | thx |
| 08:28:40 | tiemann: | camerons: within the guidelines of a non-profit org. Meaning no campaign contributions. No "political" speech endorsing specific candidates. |
| 08:29:02 | Schuyler: | tiemann: funding models? for the foundation? or for individual projects? |
| 08:29:27 | tiemann: | Schuyler: I was thinking only about the foundation. Funding individual projects is for entrepreuers. |
| 08:29:31 | brian_b: | +1 |
| 08:30:14 | nhv: | foundation can be a 'knowlege base' for those sntrepeneurs to use |
| 08:30:17 | Schuyler: | Gary: "What is the really compelling one of these?" |
| 08:30:34 | Schuyler: | Tyler: "All of them together." -- the benefits support each other and provide a network effect |
| 08:30:58 | camerons: | Funding for me means "receiving funds on behalf of projects and passing the funds along". |
| 08:31:17 | Schuyler: | Tyler: "Any one of those goals a project can just do on their own." ... but all of them together needs a foundation |
| 08:31:28 | Schuyler: | or at least that the Foundation can preclude wasted or redundant effort |
| 08:31:29 | markusN: | camerons: this is much related to the tax problem |
| 08:31:33 | danmo: | camerons: deciding on how to distribute the money quickly gets very complicated |
| 08:31:43 | Schuyler: | both in a code-related and non-code-related ( infrastructural ) way |
| 08:32:37 | tiemann: | Schuyler: if the infrastructure of the foundation is really functional, it should aleviate expnse and opportunity cost borne today by individual projects. |
| 08:33:29 | camerons: | Mapbuilder's problem is that we have potential sponsors we have found who would like to give money to our project - and to make the money go further, they'd like us to be a charitable organisation. The Foundation could be the organisation. |
| 08:33:35 | tiemann: | Schuyler: thus the only really difficult problem is ( 1 ) disbursing specific funding to specific projects and ( 2 ) prioritizing where general funding goes ( first between projects and infrastructure, second, among diverse projects ). |
| 08:33:45 | pramsey_: | If I could summarize: the foundation becomes the "vendor". |
| 08:33:49 | tiemann: | camerons: +1 |
| 08:33:58 | pramsey_: | It becomes a legitimate story-teller for the OSSGIS story. |
| 08:34:30 | pramsey_: | And you believe them becuase they have: ADSK, DM, RRI as corporations, because they have "success stories" about using mapserver and postgis and qgis and whatnot. |
| 08:34:55 | Schuyler: | camerons: I think that may be tabled until the financial discussion phase |
| 08:34:59 | pramsey_: | As "evangelists" our great frustration is that lacking a "vendor" is something to be overcome all the time. |
| 08:35:00 | Schuyler: | it's a clear need for some projects |
| 08:35:11 | nhv: | legitimate story teller +++ this is what only the foundation can do |
| 08:35:12 | Schuyler: | there may be a tradeoff in being able to provide that, though |
| 08:36:08 | Schuyler: | Gary translates that as "hacker deodorant" |
| 08:36:12 | Schuyler: | I wonder if I'm offended : ) |
| 08:36:50 | danmo: | camerons: I wouldn't want to be the one who has to decide as part of the foundation which developer out of possibly a dozen gets the money for a given feature... easy for a 1-2 developers project, not so easy when there are 20 committers |
| 08:37:04 | pramsey_: | danmo +++ |
| 08:37:12 | brian_b: | danmo: definitely agree. |
| 08:37:18 | TylerM: | More pics up now: http://www1.mapserverfoundation.org/chicago-pics/images.html |
| 08:37:19 | sigq: | Title: Image Gallery for OSGeoSpatial Foundation Chicago Meeting - Feb 4th, 2006 ( at www1.mapserverfoundation.org ) |
| 08:37:36 | brian_b: | Mozilla has full-time employees to tackle some things that require such a focus and are not likely to be done without funding |
| 08:37:40 | camerons: | Damno, Leave the funding issues to the Project PMC to decide. |
| 08:37:41 | brian_b: | but Apache has no funded developers |
| 08:37:47 | brian_b: | and doesn't even make grants |
| 08:37:55 | brian_b: | the closest Apache came was to advise Google on their summer of code thing |
| 08:38:05 | Schuyler: | danmo: that would be the advantage of bounties, if money were to do such a thing |
| 08:38:06 | brian_b: | and even that consumed more time on debate than actual hours spent working on code |
| 08:38:27 | danmo: | camerons: I don't see teh MapServer TSC wanting to deal with those financial questions |
| 08:38:35 | danmo: | Schuyler: right, bounties may solve this |
| 08:38:36 | tiemann: | Schuyler: I don't think bounties are a good model. |
| 08:38:47 | danmo: | tiemann: why not? |
| 08:39:10 | tiemann: | I wrote a piece that I sent to the Fedora Foundation people. I'll post it to my home page and you can take a look. |
| 08:39:12 | brian_b: | tiemann: I think I agree ( painful history of SourceExchange available upon request ) |
| 08:39:34 | TylerM: | PMC cannot equal just technical/dev groups - will need user reps too |
| 08:40:03 | mpg_: | tiemann: link please? |
| 08:40:10 | tiemann: | Here's why I think bounties fail... |
| 08:40:20 | tiemann: | The "bug bounty" model for funding open source development has, so far |
| 08:40:20 | tiemann: | as I can tell, been a miserable failure. There are many possible |
| 08:40:21 | tiemann: | explanations for this failure: |
| 08:40:21 | tiemann: | 1. People don't want to feel like they are paying ransom for problems |
| 08:40:21 | tiemann: | they report. |
| 08:40:21 | tiemann: | 2. In situations where bugfixes are urgently needed ( and expected ), one |
| 08:40:23 | tiemann: | should have an existing relationship of trust, not depend on |
| 08:40:25 | tiemann: | creating a new one in the heat of the moment. |
| 08:40:27 | tiemann: | 3. For every bug that bothers people, there are probably 100 bugs they |
| 08:40:29 | tiemann: | don't even know about. These bugs are often just as important, if |
| 08:40:31 | tiemann: | not directly related to, the bug in question. |
| 08:40:33 | tiemann: | 4. The design of a bug-bounty system frames software development as a |
| 08:40:37 | tiemann: | banaged-based approach. Linus never said that with enough bandages, |
| 08:40:40 | tiemann: | all wounds are shallow. |
| 08:41:16 | camerons: | tiemann++ |
| 08:41:27 | tiemann: | Try this link: http://people.redhat.com/tiemann/FF-giving.txt |
| 08:41:32 | brian_b: | also, it encourages the fastest approach to solving a problem, not necessarily the *right* approach |
| 08:41:46 | tiemann: | The link also shows my interest in personally committing funds to a GeoSpatial foundation... |
| 08:41:49 | brian_b: | and disincents the developer from taking public comment on their solution that would improve it |
| 08:42:01 | gsherman: | can somebody summarize the current discussion in the room? |
| 08:42:14 | Schuyler: | I actually am not sure what's going on right now |
| 08:42:40 | pramsey_: | what about feature-bounties, tiemann |
| 08:42:45 | Schuyler: | Gary wants to know what would make a Geo F/OSS project's life better |
| 08:42:52 | Schuyler: | he was just asking pramsey, now he's asking Steve Lime |
| 08:43:19 | Schuyler: | not having day jobs would help a lot of us : ) |
| 08:43:28 | tiemann: | I like Google's Summer of Code, but I think it works because it begins with an abundance of cash. It's a good way to decide how to unleash funds, not a good way to get funds that are needed. |
| 08:43:42 | danmo: | I was actually more thinking feature-bounties than bug bounties too |
| 08:43:56 | Schuyler: | Steve says the biggest thing is that consultants have a hard time selling MapServer as a solution |
| 08:44:01 | Schuyler: | because it's not a commercially support product |
| 08:44:23 | Schuyler: | they're the ones that would benefit greatly from a foundation providing legitimacy |
| 08:45:06 | camerons: | The issue I'm hoping the Foundation can address is "How can a sponsor give money to Project Developers tax free?" |
| 08:45:27 | tiemann: | camerons: me too |
| 08:45:56 | pramsey_: | that seems somewhat narraw |
| 08:45:58 | pramsey_: | narrow |
| 08:46:13 | pramsey_: | corporations can write this off anyways, so we're down to individual contributors. |
| 08:46:25 | TylerM: | in what country? |
| 08:46:34 | : | * FrankW agrees with pramsey_ |
| 08:46:41 | FrankW: | ... on this point at least. |
| 08:46:55 | adoyle: | camerons - do you mean tax free to the recipient? Open a swiss bank account? |
| 08:47:07 | brian_b: | TylerM: generally corporate taxes are on profits, not on income, and I imagine that would apply in most countries in the world |
| 08:47:13 | Schuyler: | Steve mentioned CMM level, I don't know what that is |
| 08:47:38 | adoyle: | Capability Maturity Model |
| 08:47:42 | brian_b: | capability and maturity model - a set of standards relating to software development processes, kind of like Sarbannes-Oxley |
| 08:47:48 | iant__: | sort of like ISO9000 ertifiation - we think at this end of the table |
| 08:47:52 | Schuyler: | obviously my capabilities aren't that mature yet : ) |
| 08:47:56 | steeler: | companies that fund development typically can take a tax deduction as a business expense. They don't need a charitable entity necessarily. Individuals are a different story |
| 08:47:58 | brian_b: | on the premise that if a process is defined, followed, and repeatable, then quality will be higher |
| 08:48:02 | brian_b: | some thing it's a bunch of hooey |
| 08:48:07 | brian_b: | thing -> think |
| 08:48:13 | tiemann: | pramsey_: I'm not saying the other goals are not important, but when I look at what /I/ can do, its contributing money |
| 08:48:15 | mpg_: | CMM: http://www.sei.cmu.edu/ |
| 08:48:16 | sigq: | Title: Software Engineering Institute ( SEI ) Home Page ( at www.sei.cmu.edu ) |
| 08:48:58 | FrankW: | tiemann: But you would need a 501c3 to do that efficiently? |
| 08:49:20 | tiemann: | Yes. |
| 08:49:29 | Schuyler: | Gary is reviewing the Things To Avoid: Organizational overhead, projects where "cost" > "benefit" ( e.g. the SF code dump ), disintermediation of developers and users, genre exclusivity, and control by ADSK |
| 08:49:49 | tiemann: | FrankW: Let me emphasize that 501( c )3 is minimum requirement for me to contribute. |
| 08:50:12 | pramsey_: | One thing to note, when we talk about the foundation as a "credible brand", the participation of ADSK is actually one of the most valuable aspects of the foundation. |
| 08:50:51 | pramsey_: | In the same way that IBM's participation in Linux allowed it out of the geek pit. |
| 08:50:53 | camerons: | I use CMM ( and CMMI ) at work every day. It would be very hard to apply all of it to Open Source as it requires a large investment in management overhead. ( Quality Control reports, measurement, project management reports ) Then to get CMMI certification is very expensive too ( in the order of $100K ) |
| 08:51:46 | Schuyler: | Gary points out that to get access to everyone's code, one needs to visit a dozen different websites and a dozen different code repositories ( or more ) |
| 08:51:46 | tiemann: | camerons: I agree that CMM is not a benefit to OSS. |
| 08:52:03 | adoyle: | Buying into the CMM myth as a foundation just helps perpetuate it anyway. It's like ISO 9000. It's a thing that feeds lots of money to certification "experts" |
| 08:52:22 | Schuyler: | pramsey_: does that mean that ADSK will start running huge billboard ads for MapServer along I-280? : ) |
| 08:52:57 | pramsey_: | Well, Gary seems to be saying they'll be running huge billboard ads for the *foundation*... |
| 08:53:19 | Schuyler: | there seems to be a big consensus that formal, organized cooperation between projects is a major goal |
| 08:53:29 | tiemann: | Schuyler: yes! |
| 08:53:36 | mpg_: | I might not use the word "formal" though |
| 08:53:37 | Schuyler: | Brian B reiterates that this is a good reason for aligning licenses |
| 08:53:45 | Schuyler: | maybe "formal" is not what people mean |
| 08:53:46 | gsherman: | Schuyler, has "cooperation" been defined |
| 08:53:49 | Schuyler: | but "organized" |
| 08:54:00 | mpg_: | I just want everyone in the same room ( a "safe place" someone said ) |
| 08:54:08 | Schuyler: | gsherman: not as such. I imagine it means different things to different projects |
| 08:54:29 | adoyle: | brian_b - that's the kind of detail I was waiting for, thanks! |
| 08:54:53 | danmo: | I think that organized cooperation is important, but can be hard to achieve sometimes, so things like incompatible licenses ( e.g. GPL vs MIT ) should not become a barrier to project joining |
| 08:55:19 | Schuyler: | Brian is really talking about common infrastructure |
| 08:55:29 | markusN: | ...moving code of existing, long time running projects may be complicated... |
| 08:55:31 | Schuyler: | and the way in which that helps Apache projects collaborate |
| 08:55:34 | Schuyler: | sharing code, etc |
| 08:56:05 | : | * tiemann is away: dog needs a walk... |
| 08:56:43 | Schuyler: | does it seem to anyone else that the discussion is starting to loop a bit? |
| 08:56:44 | adoyle: | lunch fumes are wafting in from the room next door. I think we're about to stop for lunch... |
| 08:56:47 | gsherman: | moving code/tools to a central place will require strong assurance of 24/7 support -- we've moved off from SF because of issues with website,cvs, etc |
| 08:57:14 | danmo: | gsherman: +1 ... maptools.org is my response to SF |
| 08:57:15 | gsherman: | lunch? its barely breakfast time here : ) |
| 08:57:21 | TylerM: | gsherman: so do you have 24/7 support now? |
| 08:57:25 | gsherman: | yes |
| 08:57:31 | gsherman: | tim and i : ) |
| 08:57:42 | danmo: | TylerM: same here: I have full control on the server :D |
| 08:57:46 | gsherman: | as long as he stays in the opposite hemisphere from me |
| 08:59:21 | brian_b: | gsherman: we have a 99% uptime SLA : ) |
| 09:00:12 | gsherman: | summarize that point please --- phone is cutting out |
| 09:00:18 | gsherman: | re: "weak rationale" |
| 09:00:40 | Schuyler: | Gary "Having a single nice looking webpage is a weak rationale for starting a foundation" |
| 09:00:47 | gsherman: | agreed |
| 09:00:54 | Schuyler: | "FreeGIS.org already provides that" |
| 09:01:07 | Schuyler: | Frank W points out that FreeGIS.org is not very well organized |
| 09:01:14 | Schuyler: | Markus is making the same point |
| 09:01:41 | FrankW: | My point was that freegis.org doesn't attempt to distinguish between "high quality" projects and lower quality projects |
| 09:01:41 | Schuyler: | it doesn't present a reasonably unified front, one that lays everything out for a newbie |
| 09:01:43 | mpg_: | freegis.org doesn't have the moderator/editorial impramatur of our Foundation, assuring quality projects, good support, etc |
| 09:01:49 | TylerM: | The question is partly how far can consolidation/collaboration go... |
| 09:01:53 | Schuyler: | sorry Frank : ) |
| 09:02:02 | TylerM: | should/can projects move all their repositories/pages, etc to a central foundation server |
| 09:02:05 | TylerM: | ? |
| 09:02:21 | Schuyler: | TylerM: I would think that has to be the individual decision of a participating project |
| 09:02:28 | danmo: | Schuyler: +1 |
| 09:02:31 | gsherman: | sorry for asking stupid questions, but i'm only getting about 60% of whats said |
| 09:02:31 | mpg_: | TylerM: initially no, eventually "as needed/desired" |
| 09:02:41 | Schuyler: | gsherman: please ask! |
| 09:03:21 | gsherman: | i think people need lunch -- the vocal energy levels have dropped significantly : ) |
| 09:03:21 | TylerM: | gsherman: my point was for you |
| 09:03:23 | camerons: | Tyler, Mapbuilder could move if needed ( given time ). |
| 09:03:26 | hobu: | I think that projects have to have their source repositories on foundation infrastructure, or the whole point is moot |
| 09:04:04 | : | * markusN we just bought a new server for grass.itc.it :- ) |
| 09:04:07 | camerons: | how long is lunch? |
| 09:04:21 | steeler: | brian b made the point that the foundation has to have some semblance of control over the code if an IP challenge is raised. I.e., ngoing use/distribution after a patent challenge is asserted can be disastrous |
| 09:04:25 | adoyle: | once we start, it's on the agenda for an hour |
| 09:04:33 | danmo: | hobu: you're worried about the foundation being unable to track the code at some point if it doesn't manage the source repository? |
| 09:04:53 | hobu: | more along the lines that brian_b was stating. |
| 09:05:02 | mpg_: | we are discussing foundation-as-a-portal, meaning two things: ( a ) what good projects are avail? ( b ) installer for the latest version |
| 09:05:04 | hobu: | tracking contributions |
| 09:05:10 | markusN: | hobu: we have 25 mirrors sites - how to deal with that? |
| 09:05:25 | danmo: | hobu: ok. makes sense |
| 09:05:27 | hobu: | 25 mirrored repositories? |
| 09:05:42 | danmo: | markusN: I think it's the master that matters, the mirrors can continue to exist |
| 09:05:46 | hobu: | I can check in code to 1 of 25 servers? |
| 09:05:54 | brian_b: | 25 different repositories if I understand correctly, with different code |
| 09:05:56 | brian_b: | not mirrors |
| 09:05:58 | markusN: | grass.itc.it is mirrored on 25 sites |
| 09:06:08 | markusN: | not the source code but all the rest |
| 09:06:10 | brian_b: | mirroring is still fine - there are a couple hundred apache.org mirrors |
| 09:06:32 | brian_b: | source code mirroring is possible too, though commits would still go through a central point |
| 09:06:46 | markusN: | oops, maybe we should mirror the source code as well? ( CVS replicator or so )? |
| 09:06:57 | danmo: | we have that with MapServer: master CVS at UMN, mirror on maptools.org |
| 09:06:59 | hobu: | it is a major pita to go to every project and ask for a different password/username to contribute |
| 09:07:08 | hobu: | collating that together would be nice |
| 09:07:23 | markusN: | hobu: but you want control to whom grant write access |
| 09:07:31 | danmo: | hobu: you'd still need to apply for commit rights individually for each project |
| 09:07:53 | hobu: | sure. Although I've been involved with plone, which has an open repository ( ala wiki-style ) which actually works, but I'm not advocating that |
| 09:07:55 | iant__: | easier than building a new account for each |
| 09:08:07 | brian_b: | danmo: decentralizing commit privs to the project owners is usually the right balance - at least you don't need different names/passwords |
| 09:08:14 | : | * tiemann is back ( gone 00:12:09 ) |
| 09:08:20 | danmo: | ian/me agrees |
| 09:08:22 | : | * TylerM files patent for Hacker Deodorent |
| 09:08:35 | danmo: | oopps... I meant I agree with ian and brian |
| 09:08:59 | gsherman: | near zero audio now |
| 09:09:17 | mpg_: | I think use of the Hacker Deoderant term is actually doing disservice here - perpetuates much of the Open Source myth |
| 09:09:26 | Schuyler: | yeah mpg_ I agree totally |
| 09:10:06 | Schuyler: | gsherman: I'll poke someone about that |
| 09:10:24 | gsherman: | thx |
| 09:10:48 | Schuyler: | they're talking about the value of indemnification |
| 09:10:53 | Schuyler: | as a bulwark against SCO-type threats |
| 09:12:39 | Schuyler: | Brian is saying that a non-profit might protect an individual from patent infringment judgement |
| 09:14:20 | gsherman: | has an OS developer ever been sued in the manner being discussed? ie. how important is this issue? |
| 09:14:35 | tiemann: | Schuyler: I think that there may be other organizations ( among them Red Hat and OSDL ) that have taken a strong position to defend free/open source programmers against individual patent infringements. I don't think we need each foundation protecting their own turf. Instead, we need a few central players basically saying "an attack on any of us is an attack on all" and going into action. |
| 09:14:41 | mpg_: | Brian and others giving good summary of some IP legal issues, protection around foundation, patent rights, etc ( see Rosen's "open source lisencing" text for details ) |
| 09:16:08 | Schuyler: | gsherman: Brian says there were some near cases ( RSA, Linux ), but no obvious cases |
| 09:16:17 | gsherman: | thx |
| 09:16:20 | Schuyler: | apparently the case is not individual developers but large corporate users |
| 09:16:26 | Schuyler: | becuase they have deeper pockets |
| 09:16:56 | Schuyler: | Brian also says that the ASF code and mailing list archives have been used to strike down patents with prior art claims in the past |
| 09:18:26 | : | * markusN thinks that this suggests to be very careful to move stuff to a centralized server |
| 09:18:36 | : | * markusN history must be kept |
| 09:19:59 | tiemann: | markusN: remember that kernel.org was cracked and it was the distributed synchronization of multiple servers that caught it. |
| 09:20:24 | brian_b: | tiemann: there's still just one "Linus's tree", even if replicated widely |
| 09:20:47 | brian_b: | same thing happened at apache.org |
| 09:21:01 | markusN: | tiemann: sure. I meant that things, if so, must be completely transferred ( we have AFAIK > 10 mailing lists for GRASS, to give an example ) |
| 09:24:04 | markusN: | Daniel Brookshier suggests the risk reduction by moving things to a centralized server, good point |
| 09:25:57 | FrankW: | There was no objection to unanimous consent that we would only support projects with OSI approved licenses. |
| 09:26:04 | FrankW: | Motion passed. |
| 09:26:14 | danmo: | FrankW: nice |
| 09:26:41 | gsherman: | can someone summarize the topics the breakout groups will address ( when the time comes )? |
| 09:26:49 | jasonbirch: | I don't suppose that anyone is keeping minutes online? |
| 09:27:20 | gsherman: | jasonbirch, just irc log at http://logs.qgis.org/geofoundation |
| 09:27:21 | sigq: | Title: Index of /geofoundation ( at logs.qgis.org ) |
| 09:27:30 | Schuyler: | gsherman: I think that was on the agenda? |
| 09:27:32 | markusN: | jasonbirch: and refresh often |
| 09:27:54 | garylang_: | I am keeping minutes. Will org andn publish. For now, this channel is doing a good job |
| 09:27:57 | jasonbirch: | thx all |
| 09:28:09 | gsherman: | Schuyler, yes, but i thought i heard someone mention "developing specific topics to address..." |
| 09:29:20 | Schuyler: | we'll make sure we cover that then : ) |
| 09:31:48 | mpg_: | now discussing trademark issues |
| 09:32:57 | mpg_: | and now onto Funding... |
| 09:33:27 | Schuyler: | the summary of the trademark issue seems to be "OSGeo is easier to trademark than 'Open Source Geospatial Foundation'" |
| 09:34:49 | zool: | dude, those are terrible minutes |
| 09:35:41 | Schuyler: | the conference notion is being discussed |
| 09:36:01 | Schuyler: | Arnulf is arguing for internationalized conferences |
| 09:37:50 | steeler: | ok, the westin people say the food is getting cold : ) |
| 09:38:39 | Schuyler: | Brian is saying that conferences are a good source of income for the ASF |
| 09:38:48 | Schuyler: | well *the* conference |
| 09:39:01 | jmckenna: | what conference notion? |
| 09:39:16 | jmckenna: | foss4g2006? |
| 09:39:21 | Schuyler: | basicalyl |
| 09:39:55 | adoyle: | conf can be good for income but foss4g, osgeo, etc. are run on a break-even basis to keep the costs down |
| 09:39:57 | Schuyler: | the proposal that the foundation should take over sponsoring and running those conferences |
| 09:40:05 | jmckenna: | i see ( dumb question ) |
| 09:40:48 | Schuyler: | Frank is saying that he'd like to see OSGeo take on the financial risk but allow the local organizers a lot of leeway |
| 09:40:59 | Schuyler: | that works, of course, IF you have dedicated local organizers |
| 09:41:07 | Schuyler: | as we've been fortunate enough to have so far |
| 09:41:09 | adoyle: | FOOD. FOOD. |
| 09:41:55 | mpg_: | I note that we are now already calling ourselves "OSGeo" and not "OSGF" or whatever |
| 09:41:57 | Schuyler: | to recap |
| 09:41:58 | brian_b: | is it free food? Or just Apache-licensed? |
| 09:42:13 | gsherman: | free as in food |
| 09:42:20 | adoyle: | Only OSGeo members can eat it |
| 09:42:35 | : | * brian_b mumbles something about derivative works |
| 09:42:35 | gsherman: | hmm, are there members? |
| 09:42:37 | mpg_: | Can I put the sandwich and the chips on the same plate, as a collected work? |
| 09:42:37 | Schuyler: | Uses of funding: conferences, site/infrastructure, legal support, marketing ( and presumably education ) |
| 09:42:48 | Schuyler: | Sources of funding: Membership, donations, sponsorship |
| 09:43:04 | Schuyler: | mpg_: are you planning to redistribute them? : ) |
| 09:43:18 | Schuyler: | gsherman: I think you mean "free as in lunch" |
| 09:43:26 | gsherman: | right |
| 09:44:04 | gsherman: | a comment on how the breakout groups/afternoon session will be handled on IRC would be good before the break for lunch |
| 09:44:56 | : | * brian_b suggests different IRC channels |
| 09:45:03 | adoyle: | right. |
| 09:45:06 | Schuyler: | cholmes is cautioning against overly ambitious or rapid growth in funding it seems |
| 09:45:24 | Schuyler: | the dangers of taking on too many sponsors in ambiguous ways |
| 09:45:34 | adoyle: | cholmes is wise beyond his years |
| 09:45:57 | gsherman: | he is also one of the few in the room i can hear : ) |
| 09:45:59 | TylerM: | gsherman: I think we'll have some minutes/discussion notes up |
| 09:45:59 | brian_b: | I definitely recommend a sponsorship process that is transparent and consistant |
| 09:46:59 | gsherman: | TylerM, you mean afterwards? |
| 09:47:30 | TylerM: | I think before the breakout groups...is laura on here? |
| 09:47:57 | gsherman: | and what about the phone? will there be any point in listening in before the groups come back together? |
| 09:48:15 | TylerM: | doubt it |
| 09:48:37 | zool: | it would Rock My World if each of the breakouts could also braindump onto irc, very much |
| 09:48:50 | gsherman: | zool, agreed |
| 09:49:10 | bobbray: | Maybe we can have someone in each group transcribe. |
| 09:49:21 | bobbray: | i'll bring that up here |
| 09:50:45 | adoyle: | foundation finances - http://think.random-stuff.org/FrontPage/archive/2006/01/18/chicago-in-february |
| 09:50:48 | sigq: | Title: Chicago in February blog ( at think.random-stuff.org ) |
| 09:51:03 | Schuyler: | brian_b is saying that there's a marked difference for organizations that hire staff versus those that run on volunteers |
| 09:51:33 | hobu: | and talking about sysadmin burnout for volunteers |
| 09:51:36 | Schuyler: | pros and cons to both -- the need to raise funds to support staff versus the risk of high turnover in volunteers |
| 09:54:22 | adoyle: | hotel staff is muttering in the next room about the food... |
| 09:54:41 | mpg_: | Just don't let them eat it. |
| 09:54:44 | brian_b: | to repeat something I said in person: Apache is lots of small components without a lot of stack-wise integration; Mozilla is a couple of big pieces of software that requires integration between efforts of smaller teams. Mozilla needs to fund that centrally; Apache doesn't fund it at all |
| 09:54:56 | brian_b: | so where OSGeo falls in that is a decision to make |
| 09:55:00 | jasonbirch: | I'd like to see a model that allows my organisation to support the foundation with an annual "membership" fee like we do the OGC, and also be funding development of things we need. |
| 09:55:07 | brian_b: | depends on how much OSGeo wants an integrated stack of different components |
| 09:55:08 | Schuyler: | I think we said "another 5 minutes" like 10 or 15 minutes ago |
| 09:55:24 | brian_b: | I'm going to muzzle myself now in the interests of food |
| 09:55:36 | steeler: | mmmmm fooood |
| 09:55:43 | adoyle: | I think they brought in more Sterno, the smell is coming back in |
| 09:56:43 | jack_chan: | More photos at http://biometry.gis.umn.edu/~pnaciona/photos/osgeo_meeting/ |
| 09:56:47 | brian_b: | ok, breaking for lunch |
| 09:56:48 | brian_b: | for 30 minutes |
| 09:57:01 | Schuyler: | oops, I didn't get to insert the question about break out groups |
| 09:57:17 | Schuyler: | the consensus seems to be separate IRC channels for each group |
| 09:57:42 | danmo: | jack_chan: you meant http://biometry.gis.umn.edu/~pnaciona/photos/chicago_meeting/ ? |
| 09:57:43 | sigq: | Title: Photos from the Open Source Geospatial Foundation Meeting, Chicago, IL ( 4 February 2006 ) ( at biometry.gis.umn.edu ) |
| 09:58:52 | gsherman: | Schuyler, thanks for your efforts |
| 09:59:14 | Schuyler: | gsherman: thank you! sorry you couldn't be here :-/ |
| 09:59:28 | TylerM: | no real minutes to post at present. we have some flips charts though that we'll try to transcribe and post |
| 09:59:28 | jack_chan: | Danmo: I stand corrected. Must be time for lunch ; ) |
| 09:59:51 | gsherman: | i'm going to hang up for 30 minutes and give my ear a rest : ) |
| 10:00:01 | zjames: | Schuyler: yes, thanks - invaluable for those following without audio |
| 10:00:04 | : | * danmo is glad he has a speakerphone |
| 10:00:21 | gsherman: | for those just joining, 30 minute lunch break in progress -- log of current discussions at http://logs.qgis.org/geofoundation |
| 10:00:22 | danmo: | yup, thanks Schuyler |
| 10:00:22 | sigq: | Title: Index of /geofoundation ( at logs.qgis.org ) |
| 10:22:13 | garylang_: | How is this working for everyone so far? |
| 10:23:01 | jasonbirch: | I slept in so am catching up, but seems pretty good from the logs. : ) |
| 10:29:31 | zool: | idea yet of what the irc channels for each group will be? |
| 10:30:05 | zool: | ( i am listening to irc via text-to-speech... so i want to see if i can network all N channels together... }: ) |
| 10:30:38 | zool: | ( not being there )+- |
| 10:33:07 | garylang: | Not yet |
| 10:33:12 | gsherman: | garylang, working farily well, although phone+irc is better than phone alone |
| 10:33:25 | gsherman: | i would suggest #osgeo-* ; ) |
| 10:34:04 | garylang: | OK. |
| 10:37:11 | gsherman: | zool, how does that work with all the slang and emoticons ? |
| 10:38:06 | zool: | variably |
| 10:38:14 | zool: | festival is pretty good at a lot of stuff |
| 10:38:37 | zool: | actually ( ) comments and smileys tend to get parsed out, because festival tries to interpret them as scheme, gives up and walks away |
| 10:38:41 | zool: | but i get the gist |
| 10:38:56 | zool: | sometimes the gist is more fun than the statement itself |
| 10:39:01 | gsherman: | heh |
| 10:40:51 | jasonbirch: | how often should the IRC log refresh? Last entry looks like hours ago? |
| 10:41:07 | gsherman: | all times are gmt-9 |
| 10:41:28 | ko6yq: | that's still 2 hours ago |
| 10:41:38 | gsherman: | hmm, you're right |
| 10:41:44 | gsherman: | let me check into it |
| 10:41:53 | ko6yq: | thanks! I was also just about to ask |
| 10:42:35 | ko6yq: | btw, since I spoke up, time to intro. This is Ian Kluft in San Jose. |
| 10:42:53 | : | * Tim_B hands gsherman a bart ( bot attitude readjustment tool ) |
| 10:44:07 | gsherman: | it Tim_B |
| 10:44:25 | gsherman: | er, hi Tim_B |
| 10:44:31 | gsherman: | logs should be up to date now |
| 10:44:36 | gsherman: | a glitch in the formatter |
| 10:44:43 | ko6yq: | thanks! |
| 10:45:04 | gsherman: | np de nl7od |
| 10:45:13 | Tim_B: | Hi gsherman, and all. Tim here in Austin, TX reading the proceedings to find out how he can support the developers as a user... |
| 10:45:23 | adoyle: | send money |
| 10:45:37 | gsherman: | adoyle gives the pragmatic response |
| 10:45:47 | Tim_B: | adoyle: I'm waiting to find out the address and who's name to put on the check ;- ) |
| 10:46:14 | gsherman: | should i dial in again -- anything worth listening too yet? |
| 10:46:26 | adoyle: | No |
| 10:46:35 | jasonbirch: | I want to support the developers ( through directed development contracts ) but also the foundation. |
| 10:46:35 | bobbray: | Not yet, but we should resume soon. |
| 10:46:39 | adoyle: | only about 1/4 of the ppl are back in the room |
| 10:46:58 | gsherman: | quick, that's enough -- finish the agenda |
| 10:47:31 | gsherman: | btw, log update should be instantaneous -- let me know if it isn't up to speed |
| 10:48:11 | ko6yq: | seems to work fine now. thanks for the help! |
| 10:49:07 | jgarnett: | tap tap tap - is this thing on ;- ) Hi everyone - Jody Garnett checking in ... |
| 10:50:01 | gsherman: | hi Jody -- waiting for people to get back from the lunch break |
| 10:50:44 | jgarnett: | np. |
| 10:51:02 | jgarnett: | I am mostly online to mess with GeoAPI, but thought I would sign in. |
| 10:51:35 | jgarnett: | how is the meeting going .... we had a pretty good chat about it last geotools IRC meeting. |
| 10:51:50 | gsherman: | i think its going pretty well |
| 10:52:07 | gsherman: | the log of the discussion thus far is available at http://logs.qgis.org/geofoundation |
| 10:52:08 | sigq: | Title: Index of /geofoundation ( at logs.qgis.org ) |
| 10:52:22 | jasonbirch: | Got a name, at least : ) |
| 10:52:40 | jgarnett: | thank you. |
| 10:52:48 | Schuyler: | hi Jody |
| 10:52:57 | jgarnett: | Hi |
| 10:53:10 | iant__: | morning Jody |
| 10:53:23 | jgarnett: | Actually very very late evening. |
| 10:53:29 | brian_b: | ok, we're restarting |
| 10:53:51 | jgarnett: | I'll lurk then, nice to see everyone ( and I think I mean *everyone* ) |
| 10:53:53 | bobbray: | back now, you might want to dial in |
| 10:53:55 | pramsey_: | hi jg |
| 10:54:02 | : | * hobu waves |
| 10:54:20 | Schuyler: | Gary: "The point of the charter is to achieve this stuff and avoid this stuff" -- pointing to the lists of goals and problems we enumerated earlier |
| 10:54:38 | Schuyler: | anyone have comments on the foundation charter? |
| 10:54:54 | brian_b: | charter suggestion: don't be evil |
| 10:55:01 | brian_b: | ( but do implement censorship in China? ) |
| 10:55:11 | Schuyler: | anything they want to see "baked in" that hasn't been discussed earlier |
| 10:55:28 | Schuyler: | cholmes says "faithful implementation of open standards" |
| 10:55:30 | brian_b: | Chris Holmes suggests that open standards should be a part |
| 10:55:33 | Schuyler: | general agreement around the room |
| 10:55:48 | camerons: | Have you got a straw man charter to point at? |
| 10:55:50 | : | * brian_b hands capturing-conversation baton back to Schuyler |
| 10:56:40 | jgarnett: | may want to include supporting open standards as well cholmes - some of them need work ;- ) |
| 10:56:47 | camerons: | We should use Standards were available and appropriate. Sometimes standards don't exist yet. |
| 10:56:57 | brian_b: | open standards and open source are co-dependent |
| 10:57:09 | brian_b: | and reinforcing of each other |
| 10:57:43 | Schuyler: | camerons: there isn't a straw man per se. Gary is reiterating the idea of the charter as a statement that encapsulates the commonly hoped-for goals and pitfalls established earlier. |
| 10:57:48 | camerons: | The key is OPEN as opposed to proprietary protocols. |
| 10:58:06 | ko6yq: | ...and data formats |
| 10:58:11 | : | * FrankW frequently implements support for proprietary file formats... |
| 10:58:17 | mikedmanak: | Open standards are very important, but it is the ability of Mapserver et al. to support so many standards -open or not- that make them so compelling |
| 10:58:26 | TylerM: | Here are goals we aiming for: |
| 10:58:28 | TylerM: | http://www1.mapserverfoundation.org/docs/chicago_minutes1_02-04-2006.html |
| 10:58:29 | sigq: | Title: MapServer Foundation ( at www1.mapserverfoundation.org ) |
| 10:58:33 | mpg: | ( Proprietary standards feed my children. ) |
| 10:58:57 | tiemann: | mpg: Proprietary standards eat my children |
| 10:59:05 | mpg: | ( ouch ) |
| 10:59:08 | zool: | ( but open standards let them feed themselves ; ) |
| 10:59:10 | jgarnett: | ( I like to think of it as bridging the defacto standards to the open geospatial world ) |
| 10:59:10 | TylerM: | We will be discussing the goals further in break-out groups |
| 10:59:51 | mpg: | tiemann: but I'm an big advocate of JPEG 2000 in geo too -- there's room for both |
| 11:00:30 | Schuyler: | question now is how to pick a board to pursue the charter |
| 11:00:40 | Schuyler: | Brian B is summarizing different ways of appointing a board |
| 11:01:00 | Schuyler: | the choices seem to be ( a ) board elected by members, or ( b ) board self-perpetuating |
| 11:01:11 | Schuyler: | ASF is ( a ), Mozilla Foundation is ( b ) apparently |
| 11:01:52 | Schuyler: | Brian says membership in ASF is self-selected, with new members nominated every year ( 180 so far ), and then the membership elects the board |
| 11:02:18 | Schuyler: | the board members then appoint vice presidents to chair various committees |
| 11:02:35 | Schuyler: | nice phrase: "chain of diligence" |
| 11:03:07 | Schuyler: | membership in the ASF is until member resigns or "is moved to emeritus" status |
| 11:03:14 | Schuyler: | board of 9 people, elected annually |
| 11:03:30 | Schuyler: | four basic officers, then VPs to chair each project steering committee |
| 11:04:02 | markusN: | http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html |
| 11:04:03 | sigq: | Title: How the ASF works - The Apache Software Foundation ( at www.apache.org ) |
| 11:04:08 | Schuyler: | ah thanks markusN : ) |
| 11:04:16 | iant__: | vps *from* projects |
| 11:07:02 | mpg: | ( it's snowing ) |
| 11:07:18 | danmo: | is this why everybody got so quiet? |
| 11:07:21 | mpg: | discussing staggering of board |
| 11:07:32 | gsherman: | danmo, you listening on the phone? |
| 11:07:40 | danmo: | gsherman: yes |
| 11:08:10 | Schuyler: | Brian suggests that the board can be hands-off, unlike the Apache board, which is very hands on |
| 11:08:11 | danmo: | I share your pain... tough to follow... combining IRC + phone helps a lot |
| 11:08:14 | gsherman: | hope you're getting more than i am |
| 11:08:37 | gsherman: | lots of fades... |
| 11:09:11 | Schuyler: | adoyle suggests that the composition of PMCs versus Board will depend on how much influence or control the Board exerts on the PMCs |
| 11:09:27 | danmo: | yeah... " boar members .... .ers ... two aspects ... each .. report to the bord ..." |
| 11:09:32 | gsherman: | heh |
| 11:09:40 | gsherman: | Schuyler is our only hope : ) |
| 11:10:05 | : | * danmo hands some energy boost drink to Schuyler |
| 11:10:17 | Schuyler: | Brian: "Is this group acting in the benefit of this non-profit? ... It's about good communities and good code is a side benefit of good communities" |
| 11:10:33 | Schuyler: | he says, referring to PMCs and projects generally |
| 11:11:03 | Schuyler: | The only leverage the Board has against groups that are non-productive or actively destructive is evicting them from the foundation |
| 11:11:32 | Schuyler: | this was a consensus decision in the case of Avalon project |
| 11:11:33 | zool: | what dodgy language |
| 11:11:54 | mpg: | Brian defines 'consensus' as not 100% agreement -- more like "disagree and commit" model |
| 11:13:28 | camerons: | I'm happy with the board having "eviction" rights over a project. Is there any other leverage that the board should have? |
| 11:13:30 | Schuyler: | "even when we shut Avalon down, they took their code over to SourceForge and continues from there" |
| 11:13:49 | Schuyler: | Brian emphasizes the "right to fork" -- the guarantee of Open Source licenses |
| 11:14:10 | Schuyler: | so a project that parts ways with the foundation primarily loses the right to use the name of the foundation |
| 11:14:17 | Schuyler: | and nothing concretely beyond that |
| 11:14:34 | Schuyler: | Brian is describing the idea of project incubation |
| 11:14:46 | Schuyler: | sort of a stepping stone to becoming a full-fledged project |
| 11:15:09 | Schuyler: | or perhaps, a process by which a community works towards full-fledged affiliation with the ASF |
| 11:15:09 | garylang: | can you all hear Brian? |
| 11:15:24 | gsherman: | about 50-70% |
| 11:15:27 | jasonbirch: | intermittantly |
| 11:15:37 | danmo: | I was going to give him 75% for the last minute |
| 11:15:39 | Schuyler: | and demonstrates that they have healthy, collaborative development processes |
| 11:15:41 | danmo: | should all projects, including MapGuide and MapServer go through the incubation step? |
| 11:15:56 | mapslob_chicago: | i think so... |
| 11:16:08 | garylang: | Why should they? |
| 11:16:11 | Schuyler: | Mark Lucas asks about committer approval process and so on |
| 11:16:11 | hobu: | incubation++ |
| 11:16:16 | jasonbirch: | I don't. |
| 11:16:18 | Schuyler: | garylang: it levels the fields |
| 11:16:22 | Schuyler: | no one gets special treatment |
| 11:16:25 | mapslob_chicago: | why shouldn't they? |
| 11:16:30 | Schuyler: | what Steve said |
| 11:16:46 | jasonbirch: | Established code bases with a commitement to active development. |
| 11:16:47 | mpg: | Incubation is good, but a number of geo projects should be able to "graduate" from the inc. right away, based on their past history |
| 11:17:03 | garylang: | In what avenue are founders tentative participants? |
| 11:17:15 | garylang: | And who says what the graduation criteria is? |
| 11:17:37 | mpg: | The mumble mumble board muble should decide |
| 11:17:51 | garylang: | What if I think $10M/year is a graduation requirement? That'd be nonsensical. |
| 11:17:58 | garylang: | Yet MapGuide would pass |
| 11:18:14 | danmo: | perhaps good questions for one of the breakout group this afternoon? |
| 11:18:15 | Schuyler: | examples are being discussed that meet the ASF's incubation graduation status |
| 11:18:20 | Schuyler: | e.g. PostGIS |
| 11:18:40 | garylang: | I see. Interesting. |
| 11:18:41 | Schuyler: | Brian says the ASF flexes the rules based on the project |
| 11:18:46 | mpg: | You're only one board member; I'd vote against that high a hurdle -- maybe graduation is more subjective, not quantitative? |
| 11:18:57 | mapslob_chicago: | shouldnn't potential things like ip, copyright violations should be tracked down? |
| 11:19:03 | mpg: | yes |
| 11:19:15 | Schuyler: | clearly we need to adopt our own standards |
| 11:20:13 | camerons: | The board should have "guidelines" for graduation, and have a bit of leeway to adjust the rules based on circumstances. |
| 11:20:29 | danmo: | camerons: I like that |
| 11:20:56 | : | * markusN mhh: GRASS exists since 1982 - does it qualify? |
| 11:21:03 | danmo: | phone down to 12% |
| 11:21:12 | adoyle: | The cleanest thing to do is set rules up front and follow them with full visibility. That sets the precedent for no "favorites". If the board is going to "adjust" the rules, then that rationale must be public |
| 11:21:48 | Schuyler: | +1 adoyle |
| 11:22:04 | jgarnett: | +1 as well |
| 11:22:08 | camerons: | +1 |
| 11:22:13 | jack_chan: | +1 |
| 11:22:15 | adoyle: | The rules would probably not be so stringent as to exclude GRASS or MapServer. But there can be some time requirement. E.g. minimum of 1 month in incubator |
| 11:22:23 | danmo: | +1 then |
| 11:22:27 | mpg: | +0 |
| 11:22:31 | jgarnett: | what is this phone you guys keep talking about ( skyupe, or some landline I cannot afford to tap into from here ) |
| 11:22:53 | danmo: | http://lists.mapserverfoundation.org/pipermail/discuss/2006-February/000519.html |
| 11:22:54 | sigq: | Title: [MSF-Discuss] Call-in numbers for Saturday's Meeting ( at lists.mapserverfoundation.org ) |
| 11:22:55 | iant__: | landline |
| 11:23:03 | camerons: | Jody, details on the email list. |
| 11:23:12 | jasonbirch: | There are a number of existing projects ( mapserver,geotools, postgis, GRASS, etc ) that should not have to incubate. I think that MapGuide should also not have to incubate due to the commitment by autodesk to develop the code, the quality of the application, and the likelihhod of adoption by existing MapGuide customers. |
| 11:23:13 | adoyle: | U.S. +1888-709-9420 |
| 11:23:13 | adoyle: | International +1-630-395-0017 |
| 11:23:14 | adoyle: | |
| 11:23:14 | adoyle: | Passcode: 15857 |
| 11:23:24 | jgarnett: | At the very least the incubator should cover the needs for what the foundation wants to cover ( ie. copywrite, patents, use of open standards, maybe interoptability ) |
| 11:23:28 | mpg: | +1 jasonbirch |
| 11:23:36 | jgarnett: | I would also ask for open-development. |
| 11:24:01 | zool: | why not ask everyone to incubate? |
| 11:24:12 | zool: | are there strong reasons not-to-delay? |
| 11:24:18 | Schuyler: | Gary has reiterated that he thinks that incubation of established mature projects is inappropriate |
| 11:24:19 | jasonbirch: | there have to be some perks to being there in the beginning : ) |
| 11:24:20 | : | * zool shrug |
| 11:24:34 | mikedmanak: | rules for graduation could be based on things like proper code documentation/ comments, support of open standard formats vs. community activity or sales figures. |
| 11:24:36 | Schuyler: | Frank W says that there still needs to be a review process for all initial projects |
| 11:24:44 | zool: | FrankW++ |
| 11:24:45 | Schuyler: | i.e. IP review, confirmation of a suitable license, etc |
| 11:24:51 | jgarnett: | at least have a checklist, if a project can can run through it right away so much the better. |
| 11:25:01 | Schuyler: | mpg is recommending grandfathering for existing established projects |
| 11:25:03 | jasonbirch: | Absolutely. |
| 11:25:28 | jasonbirch: | Projects must meet the requirements of the foundations before joining, but this is different than incubation |
| 11:25:30 | adoyle: | More strongly, Gary has said that Autodesk does not want to expend all these resources for something they would be a provisional member of. That is also a pretty reasonable statement from their point of view. |
| 11:25:43 | Schuyler: | jasonbirch: that seems to be the consensus here. |
| 11:25:52 | pramsey_: | What do you think of the ASF community diversity requirement for graduation? |
| 11:26:35 | FrankW: | pramsey_: even for "grandfathered" projects? |
| 11:26:48 | pramsey_: | Let's pretend not. |
| 11:26:50 | : | * danmo wonders what are Chelo's chances of getting an answer on #mapserver today : ) |
| 11:27:18 | Schuyler: | Tyler asserts that the community ( or the board? ) should state a list of standards for projects that can join OSGeo and a process for adding them |
| 11:27:24 | FrankW: | Chelo? |
| 11:27:25 | camerons: | "grandfathered"=? |
| 11:27:32 | Schuyler: | and then test the standards and the process on the obvious list of existing projects |
| 11:27:39 | FrankW: | ah |
| 11:27:40 | Schuyler: | e.g. MapServer, MapGuide, PostGIS, GDAL |
| 11:27:56 | mikedmanak: | Grandfathered = allowed in without passing requirements of "new" projects |
| 11:27:56 | danmo: | FrankW: whoever that is, he keeps pinging the channel |
| 11:28:08 | hobu: | OSSIM, geotools, mapbuilder, |
| 11:28:11 | Schuyler: | that way we know whether or not those standards are usable in the future |
| 11:31:09 | mikedmanak: | If foundation is to adopt "Grandfathering" clause, there should be an open enrollment period in which established projects can apply to be grandfathered in, not just current favorites. |
| 11:31:13 | Schuyler: | Gary is suggesting the opposite of Tyler's suggestion: start by assuming that everyone that's come here today represents a project that belongs in the Foundation... and use that to reverse engineer what the agreed standards are |
| 11:32:12 | camerons: | By "coming here" do you include projects represented virtually ( eg Mapbuilder )? |
| 11:32:25 | markusN: | Gary is suggesting the opposite of Tyler's suggestion: start by assuming that everyone that's come to Chicago today represents a project that belongs in the Foundation... and use that to reverse engineer what the agreed standards are |
| 11:32:30 | jgarnett: | ( foundation by empirical method - I like it ) |
| 11:32:46 | Schuyler: | camerons: I think so |
| 11:32:59 | Schuyler: | ( personally, not speaking for anyone else ) |
| 11:33:53 | Schuyler: | Arnulf points out that we are a remarkably civil community... and that we should trust each other |
| 11:34:25 | Schuyler: | Gary says he wants to see 4 or 5 projects come away today intending to be initial member projects of the community |
| 11:34:44 | Schuyler: | mpg recommends we settle on half a dozen projects to serve as exemplars who are in automatically |
| 11:34:56 | Schuyler: | and use their commonalities to establish the standards for others |
| 11:35:05 | Schuyler: | and encourage other projects to join the incubation process |
| 11:36:55 | Schuyler: | Gary is composing a straw man list: MapServer, PostGIS, GDAL, GeoServer, GeoTools, GRASS, and MapGuide |
| 11:37:21 | Schuyler: | PROJ.4, GEOS |
| 11:38:55 | camerons: | I assume JUMP should be there and I'd like to see Mapbuilder on that list too. |
| 11:39:04 | Schuyler: | Tyler points out that of those 8, we don't know which would want to actually join |
| 11:39:08 | jgarnett: | ... all server projects. Hopefully MapBuilder can make it? |
| 11:39:09 | jasonbirch: | UDig? QGis? |
| 11:39:23 | Schuyler: | I was going to recommend QGIS also |
| 11:39:24 | jgarnett: | gvSig as well |
| 11:39:35 | iant__: | we're just discussing adding client code |
| 11:40:14 | markusN: | it may be ordered by functionality or so |
| 11:40:34 | Schuyler: | there are a LOT of projects that are worthy |
| 11:41:11 | jasonbirch: | That's good for us... though harder to keep the foundation startup managable |
| 11:41:29 | Schuyler: | Gary is inviting individuals to pick their four top choices to get a sense of which of these are most core |
| 11:41:34 | jgarnett: | ( is anyone from DeeGree attending, they have a JUMP based project somewhere ... I always want them to get out more ) |
| 11:41:51 | Schuyler: | jgarnett: I don't think so |
| 11:41:58 | danmo: | how'bout asking which projects are interested in being part of the initial round *and* to commit the effort to help define the process? |
| 11:42:10 | jgarnett: | bleah, wonder if anyone told them ;- ) |
| 11:42:12 | Schuyler: | adoyle mentions GeoNetwork |
| 11:42:23 | Schuyler: | jgarnett: this is part of what the Foundation is intended to fix! |
| 11:42:36 | jgarnett: | ( good I want at least one catalog server around - hard to have a useful infrastructure without it ) |
| 11:43:17 | jgarnett: | aka GeoNetwork = catalog server ( I think they were working on openstandards too ) |
| 11:43:26 | : | * markusN wonders how people *generate* their GIS data and derived maps... non FOSS software? |
| 11:43:43 | danmo: | data? what's that for? ; ) |
| 11:43:56 | markusN: | bingo |
| 11:44:07 | jgarnett: | come on you have not bought into the geospatial wiki idea yet? Let the users with GPS units grab it ... |
| 11:44:16 | Schuyler: | mpg reminds us that this is just a starting point |
| 11:44:36 | jgarnett: | good question though - should any free datasets be supported? Or are we a software only organization .... |
| 11:44:38 | Schuyler: | it's been pointed out that the board composition must depend on the project constituency |
| 11:44:45 | jgarnett: | .. thinking of euope where such things matter. |
| 11:44:50 | Schuyler: | Tyler recommends appointing an interim Board |
| 11:44:57 | Schuyler: | jgarnett: that has been discussed! |
| 11:45:13 | jgarnett: | ( ... goes back to lurking and catching up on the earlier logs ) |
| 11:45:29 | Tim_B: | It seems to me that there are some projects that heavily depend on other projects. Mapserver on GDAL, OGR, and PostGIS for example. What would happen if some of those subdependent project don't want to be part of the foundation? |
| 11:45:31 | Schuyler: | jgarnett: sorry I didn't mean that to be a smackdown, I mean "great idea!" |
| 11:45:43 | markusN: | jgarnett: I meant spatial data analysis before disseminating them online |
| 11:45:56 | Schuyler: | Tim_B: I made a similar recommendation... |
| 11:46:06 | jgarnett: | ah, thanks guys. |
| 11:46:16 | jgarnett: | There is one ( and only one ) Java project that I feel must be included. |
| 11:46:16 | danmo: | Tim_B: that may not be a problem... MapServer depends on Curl but it's not part of the foundation |
| 11:46:23 | Schuyler: | jgarnett: GeoTools? |
| 11:46:30 | jgarnett: | GeoAPI - it is the shared outreach project |
| 11:46:32 | FrankW: | Tim_B: The point was made that the projects are still around whether they are in the foundation or not. |
| 11:46:38 | jgarnett: | where geotools and other java toolkits get there game on. |
| 11:47:11 | iant__: | geoapi is closly related to OGC and may not want to be in the foundation aswell |
| 11:47:26 | jgarnett: | It has all the interfaces allowing Java projects to interoperate - |
| 11:47:31 | iant__: | the overhead might become too hard for them |
| 11:47:33 | jgarnett: | but geoapi is also tracking ISO specificaitons. |
| 11:47:38 | danmo: | it has *some* interfaces |
| 11:47:48 | danmo: | nothing in this world is the solution to everything |
| 11:48:17 | Schuyler: | the matter of what will happen if a large project opts out is being discussed |
| 11:48:20 | jgarnett: | very zen danmo |
| 11:48:40 | Schuyler: | Gary doesn't think that the foundation will succeed, mpg and Arnulf and others seem to think otherwise |
| 11:49:13 | Schuyler: | ( won't succeed IF some key project were to opt out ) |
| 11:49:37 | jgarnett: | ( should not matter, open standards protect the foundation from sidelined, open source keeps us from loosing out on implementations ) |
| 11:49:52 | Schuyler: | adoyle suggests that we start with those communities that are most excited to participate |
| 11:50:02 | danmo: | adoyle++ |
| 11:50:11 | mpg: | We should take on projects now that we know can/will succeed with, so as to demonstrate success and understanding and viability, for future projects |
| 11:50:17 | jgarnett: | ( people rather then technology, adole++ ) |
| 11:50:30 | danmo: | mpg++ |
| 11:50:36 | Schuyler: | jgarnett: arnulf has been saying a lot of that also |
| 11:51:06 | jasonbirch: | applause? |
| 11:51:09 | danmo: | ? |
| 11:51:12 | gsherman: | ? |
| 11:51:16 | danmo: | ?? |
| 11:51:20 | Tim_B: | That's my concern... Maybe I'm wrong, but without gdal/ogr/proj4 ( examples ) mapserver is nearly useless. If those projects don't join the foundation, they can essentially still control the foundation because of the critical dependance. |
| 11:51:22 | gsherman: | ?++ |
| 11:51:26 | Schuyler: | Frank W and Tom both think that if the MapServer technical steering committee agrees |
| 11:51:27 | mpg: | FrankW is showing diplomacy skills |
| 11:51:37 | Schuyler: | AND the MapServer users vote for it, then MS will join the foundation |
| 11:51:59 | Schuyler: | ( this is apparently the first time that anyone has asserted a way for the MapServer community to even decide ) |
| 11:52:06 | : | * danmo is scared when he hears "users vote for it" ... how do you manage that? |
| 11:52:24 | jgarnett: | Tim_B - JTS is closed development, but there is a huge body of dependent code. It should not be a problem. |
| 11:52:28 | Schuyler: | danmo ... ask Frank and Tom : ) |
| 11:52:32 | FrankW: | danmo: You just do a poll ( after the MTSC voted ). |
| 11:52:38 | jgarnett: | We can go high level, where interoptability, users and data live. |
| 11:52:44 | gsherman: | danmo, charge everybody $20 to vote |
| 11:52:54 | danmo: | gsherman: LOL |
| 11:54:58 | Schuyler: | okay, now the size and composition of an initial board is being discussed |
| 11:55:18 | jasonbirch: | 42 |
| 11:55:23 | gsherman: | did i just hear that "user" is a four letter word? |
| 11:55:32 | mpg: | can't have an even number, sorry |
| 11:55:38 | Schuyler: | <brian_b> "There are only two industries in the world that call their customers 'users'" |
| 11:55:48 | garylang: | Gary - it's an old joke |
| 11:55:53 | jasonbirch: | somebody is 0? |
| 11:56:22 | mpg: | mpg and cholmes note interim board should be either smaller or larger than real board |
| 11:56:32 | Schuyler: | smaller and/or larger |
| 11:57:38 | ko6yq: | makes sense for interim board to be smaller since their task is to get things going |
| 11:57:56 | mpg: | ... or larger, to be fully representative |
| 11:58:11 | Schuyler: | Brian: "How much do you want this to be like a non-profit software company and how much do you want it to be like an air traffic control tower?" |
| 11:58:22 | ko6yq: | that's the job of the board after the interim stage |
| 11:58:46 | Schuyler: | the question of how to incorporate user representation is being discussed |
| 11:59:49 | Schuyler: | it's a bit strange, we're up in the top floor of the Westin and enormous jet airliners periodically float extremely close by on their way on landing at O'Hare |
| 11:59:52 | Schuyler: | rather uncanny |
| 11:59:58 | jgarnett: | I think that would be the job of the PMC for each project. To talk to and present the views of their users. |
| 12:00:14 | mpg: | hence the Air Traffic Controller analogies |
| 12:00:35 | jasonbirch: | Does there need to be a PMC rep from each project on the board? |
| 12:00:48 | pramsey_: | not so scalable, jasonbirch |
| 12:00:56 | jgarnett: | No let the board talk the the PMC ... |
| 12:01:10 | jgarnett: | ... if they need to check in on some issue or other. |
| 12:01:16 | iant__: | though that is the apche model - one vp from each project |
| 12:01:35 | jasonbirch: | do the pmcs elect the board, or the members of each project, or members of the foundation? |
| 12:01:42 | ko6yq: | bylaws can give non-voting seats to some, if there's too much demand for part of the board |
| 12:01:48 | bobbray: | Jason: the board would be too big if every PMC had a member on the board |
| 12:02:05 | jasonbirch: | I'm wondering how the board remains accountable to the projects and their users |
| 12:02:10 | iant__: | how many projects are we considering? |
| 12:02:41 | pramsey_: | N |
| 12:02:53 | mpg: | n-1 |
| 12:02:54 | bobbray: | the board is elected by the members, at least that is the way Apache works |
| 12:02:57 | iant__: | so an N + 7 ( or 9 ) board |
| 12:03:54 | jasonbirch: | so how is membership granted? An recommendation of PMCs? |
| 12:04:14 | iant__: | election by existing members |
| 12:04:31 | bobbray: | I think in Apache recommendation of a member via election process |
| 12:04:48 | jasonbirch: | immaculate conception members? : ) |
| 12:05:21 | Schuyler: | looks like we're moving to breakouts now |
| 12:06:27 | Schuyler: | groups are governance, legal + IPR + licenses, funding, community |
| 12:06:48 | jasonbirch: | what does community mean? |
| 12:06:49 | Schuyler: | so, I recommend we start #osgeo-governance, #osgeo-legal, #osgeo-funding, #osgeo-community |
| 12:07:04 | adoyle: | Everyone tell Schuyler he's doing a great job!! |
| 12:07:17 | Schuyler: | jasonbirch: I think that's the group that's going to cover processes for getting projects to join etc |
| 12:07:34 | jasonbirch: | adoyle++ |
| 12:07:34 | Schuyler: | unless I'm sorely mistaken |
| 12:07:36 | mpg: | thank you Schuyler |
| 12:07:51 | jasonbirch: | must have sore fingers |
| 12:08:09 | jgarnett: | thanks schuyler |
| 12:08:18 | jgarnett: | join #osgeo-community |
| 12:09:17 | ko6yq: | thanks Schuyler! |
| 12:10:46 | adoyle: | Now I can be in 4 places at once! |
| 12:10:51 | : | * TylerM moves to osgeo-community |
| 12:10:52 | Schuyler: | Community group is Howard, Mark, Claude, Daniel, Tyler, Markus & Perry |
| 12:11:02 | Schuyler: | Legal is James, Chris, Rich, Steve, and me |
| 12:11:11 | Schuyler: | Funding is Ian, Paul, Brian and Dave M |
| 12:11:14 | Schuyler: | and Tom |
| 12:11:47 | Schuyler: | and Governance is Bob, Brian, Michael, Arnulf, and John |
| 12:11:56 | mpg: | ( "Michael" == mpg ) |
| 12:12:00 | markusN: | Funding is Ian, Paul, Brian and Dave and Tom |
| 12:12:09 | : | * brian_b is heading to governance, on demand |
| 12:12:51 | gsherman: | i suppose at this point it makes little sense to remain on the phone? |
| 12:17:04 | : | * gsherman goes off to do some plumbing so the group logs will be available online |
| 12:17:44 | jgarnett: | gsherman++ thank you ;- ) |
| 12:17:50 | ko6yq: | thanks for the help. I joined all the channels as they started and can provide my logs. |
| 12:18:39 | gsherman: | ko6yq, they are all being logged, just need to set it up so they can be viewed via the web |
| 12:18:59 | ko6yq: | ok, thanks for your help. |
| 12:20:28 | garylang: | Any thoughts so far? |
| 12:20:57 | garylang: | I am sorry for the sub-par voice listening capabilities here |
| 12:24:26 | gsherman: | garylang, thats ok -- hard to get it so 25 people can be heard without an elaborate conference system |
| 12:32:02 | gsherman: | all logs, including break-out groups, are available at http://logs.qgis.org/geofoundation |
| 12:32:03 | sigq: | Title: Index of /geofoundation ( at logs.qgis.org ) |
| 12:37:00 | fk: | gsherman: thanks : ) |
| 12:53:35 | fk: | Schuyler: Thanks for transcribing : ) |
| 13:11:38 | adoyle: | From #osgeo-governance - Do IRC people feel they want to be considered for the interim board today? The idea is we would select 5 people now, up to 4 later |
| 13:14:54 | : | * nhv decloaks |
| 13:15:12 | jgarnett: | depends who is on the list ;- ) I am well content with the range of projects represented - and in open source we start from a position of trust. |
| 13:16:39 | : | * danmo passes |
| 13:27:25 | zool_voxbot: | it went very quiet? |
| 13:31:13 | nhv: | zool in sub chats #osgeo-governance, #osgeo-legal, #osgeo-funding, #osgeo-community |
| 13:40:07 | jgarnett: | they are on other lists now |
| 13:40:27 | jgarnett: | break out irc sessions osgeo-community, osgeo-funding, osgeo-legal, osgeo-governance |
| 13:40:52 | jgarnett: | can someone here translate PSC for me, it appeared on several channels now. |
| 13:41:12 | danmo: | project steering committee |
| 13:41:24 | jgarnett: | good working assumption - thanks |
| 13:42:38 | adoyle: | we chose project steering committee instead of project management committee out of sensitivity |
| 13:48:23 | gsherman: | is the phone offline? Or are we done with it? |
| 13:48:48 | mlucasOSSIM: | checking |
| 13:48:52 | mlucasOSSIM: | phone online |
| 13:48:54 | gsherman: | ok |
| 13:48:56 | gsherman: | thx |
| 13:49:12 | danmo: | is the whole group back together or is there another break? |
| 13:49:31 | steeler: | we're back |
| 13:49:32 | adoyle: | jgarnett++ |
| 13:49:43 | adoyle: | You're "trust" quote was quoted |
| 13:49:49 | adoyle: | s/'// |
| 13:49:57 | jgarnett: | gah? |
| 13:50:30 | adoyle: | jgarnett: depends who is on the list I am well content with the range of projects represented - and in open source we start from a position of trust. |
| 13:50:57 | adoyle: | brian_b is summing up the governance thread |
| 13:51:07 | jgarnett: | I am glad you liked it ;- ) |
| 13:51:32 | danmo: | gsherman: did you say that the phone was not working any more? ( wondering if I should call or not ) |
| 13:51:43 | gsherman: | working now |
| 13:51:44 | nhv: | phone id working |
| 13:52:07 | adoyle: | http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=tranche seems to be a popular word in governance discussions |
| 13:52:08 | sigq: | Title: Dictionary.com/tranche ( at dictionary.reference.com ) |
| 13:52:51 | jasonbirch: | nominations for +20 accepted how? |
| 13:53:02 | adoyle: | "from the community" |
| 13:53:14 | jasonbirch: | but by whom? |
| 13:53:17 | adoyle: | Via some public call. Maybe freegis? |
| 13:53:24 | bobbray: | community nominates, then 25 votes up to 20 nominees as members |
| 13:53:25 | adoyle: | By the initial 25 |
| 13:54:14 | : | * adoyle wishes to start a drinking game on "tranche" |
| 13:55:00 | Schuyler: | so this is as was discussed in #osgeo-governance |
| 13:55:05 | Schuyler: | does anyone need a recap? |
| 13:55:09 | adoyle: | brian_b continues - |
| 13:55:50 | adoyle: | PSC is instantiated via board resolution, this is part of the chain of diligence |
| 13:56:11 | Schuyler: | each project would have its own set of project by-laws |
| 13:56:14 | Schuyler: | that's interesting |
| 13:56:25 | adoyle: | "could have". |
| 13:56:38 | adoyle: | drink! |
| 13:56:45 | Schuyler: | also, one thing that Brian said earlier which I think is important to some is that the board itself will not make technical decisions -- that's up to the projects themselves |
| 13:57:21 | nhv: | right board can suggest but not dictate |
| 13:57:25 | adoyle: | PSC rep ( aka VP ) is not given a board seat |
| 13:58:09 | adoyle: | ASF did have to boot out a project once. |
| 13:58:23 | Schuyler: | "what does the board do?" |
| 13:58:31 | danmo: | gsherman: phone is much better now : ) |
| 13:58:37 | gsherman: | yes |
| 13:58:41 | nhv: | phone ++ |
| 13:59:06 | adoyle: | Interim board to define membership levels |
| 13:59:09 | Schuyler: | the interim board will define the incubator model + graduation criteria, the set up for the *real* board and how elections will work, the classes of membership, and |
| 13:59:29 | Schuyler: | bylaws, formal incorporation ( which means charter wording ) and IP rules |
| 13:59:47 | Schuyler: | some of this may be performed by committee assigned by the board to the particular task |
| 14:00:00 | Schuyler: | "project" need not be software, apparently |
| 14:00:01 | adoyle: | Basically, interim board is in charge of dealing with all the hard parts that still have to be defined. |
| 14:00:08 | adoyle: | This has to be done openly |
| 14:00:11 | Schuyler: | so "curriculum development" might qualify as a project |
| 14:00:29 | Schuyler: | project steering committees can have members that are not members of the foundation |
| 14:00:36 | adoyle: | Hence the notion that being on the interim board is going to be real work, not a fluff position |
| 14:00:47 | Schuyler: | however, the PSC representative to the board must be a foundation member |
| 14:01:29 | arnulf: | #geofoundation |
| 14:01:32 | Schuyler: | Brian points out the the Apache board's mailing list is fully transparent |
| 14:01:45 | Schuyler: | ( except in matters that require confidence for legal reasons ) |
| 14:01:49 | zool_voxbot: | i just wanted to say this before i drop off: thankyou all very much for sharing your voices here on irc, even if they all sound the same to me, e.g. like kevin lenzo in a silo. what you did looks just great. |
| 14:03:28 | adoyle: | Proposal is that we agree on the substance & elect 5 people right now, to be joined by 4 more later |
| 14:03:29 | Schuyler: | 2/3 of current membership can remove a board member after 6 months grace, or when the bylaws are set |
| 14:05:00 | Schuyler: | drink! |
| 14:05:02 | jasonbirch: | How about allowing votes on initial 5 from IRC participants too? |
| 14:05:33 | danmo: | once again hard to control who is on IRC. I personally trust the 25 people in Chicago |
| 14:05:45 | FrankW: | alas no was the report... |
| 14:05:53 | Schuyler: | Gary is arguing the point |
| 14:06:12 | jgarnett: | and on IRC we only get a portion of the discussion ... let the meeting continue! |
| 14:06:39 | jgarnett: | ( we can be the peanut gallery, the community group may even make a logo for us ) |
| 14:06:48 | adoyle: | I would wager that the IRC can attempt to influence us. |
| 14:06:53 | Schuyler: | the consensus seems to be that we need to figure out who might be on that slate first |
| 14:06:56 | danmo: | where's seang when we need him? |
| 14:07:08 | Schuyler: | we'll make sure that the IRC participants get a chance to complain, at least : ) |
| 14:07:29 | adoyle: | seang: stocking up for the superbowl party? |
| 14:07:45 | jasonbirch: | I see a lot of control going to the initial 25, especially in selecting the next 20, from whom the next 4 are chosen? No interest myself, but... |
| 14:07:51 | TylerM: | Considering that my dog has been adding comments all day long, how do we know who you *really* are ; ) |
| 14:07:54 | TylerM: | heh |
| 14:08:21 | gsherman: | bark bark |
| 14:08:39 | danmo: | so spatialguru_ is following at home? |
| 14:09:00 | adoyle: | FrankW suggests the "real" board be elected at FOSS4G |
| 14:09:12 | Schuyler: | mpg points out that the people being nominated as members today are going to be expected to be available for volunteer jobs requested by the board |
| 14:09:29 | Schuyler: | authority demands responsibility |
| 14:10:03 | : | * nhv suggests that board members are not all elected at once in future |
| 14:10:07 | adoyle: | I'm not fit to empty Schuyler's wastebaskets... |
| 14:10:17 | Schuyler: | pfff |
| 14:10:17 | nhv: | eg we need a staggered change oc memberhip |
| 14:10:30 | danmo: | nhv: +1 |
| 14:10:33 | Schuyler: | +1 nhv |
| 14:10:33 | nhv: | so as to incure some continuity |
| 14:10:36 | Schuyler: | that HAS been discussed |
| 14:10:37 | FrankW: | nhv: that remains to be dtermined, but has been suggested. |
| 14:10:39 | Schuyler: | and generally approved |
| 14:10:55 | Schuyler: | but yeah... yet to be decided |
| 14:11:38 | Schuyler: | adoyle wants to know if this board is legally responsible or not |
| 14:11:57 | Schuyler: | brian_b says that the board's first job is to incorporate |
| 14:12:04 | nhv: | so if 20 are to be elected in 6 mos or at FOSS4G and membership is for a year we will have a staggered board |
| 14:12:18 | jasonbirch: | It will need to be, unless formation of the foundation waits until the official board is elected. |
| 14:13:10 | nhv: | I say the initial 25 postions need to be reelected 1 year from today |
| 14:13:20 | danmo: | nhv: I think you may be mixing board members ( 5+4 ) and foundation memebers ( 25+20 )... or is it me? |
| 14:13:23 | Schuyler: | foreign citizens *can* be members of the foundation, even though incorporated in the US |
| 14:13:26 | jasonbirch: | do board members need to be US citizens? |
| 14:13:35 | jasonbirch: | oops sorry |
| 14:13:39 | danmo: | foundation members don't need to be reelected AFAIK |
| 14:13:39 | nhv: | ah I think this should apply to board and members |
| 14:13:42 | FrankW: | No, they do not need to be us citizens. |
| 14:13:44 | pramsey_: | yes, I think the initial 25 members should timeout |
| 14:13:59 | nhv: | all members should time out |
| 14:14:03 | FrankW: | nhv: Note that the "membership" is self-perpetuating. |
| 14:14:06 | nhv: | 1 year positions |
| 14:14:10 | nhv: | ah ok |
| 14:14:17 | Schuyler: | hey cholmes |
| 14:14:19 | ko6yq: | for clarity "members of the board" should be referred to as "directors" |
| 14:14:22 | Schuyler: | or iant__ |
| 14:14:23 | nhv: | I am confuded forgive me |
| 14:14:26 | FrankW: | ah |
| 14:14:33 | Schuyler: | how do you guys feel about the Java community representation |
| 14:14:41 | cholmes: | yeah? |
| 14:14:41 | Schuyler: | I'm really concerned about this |
| 14:15:07 | iant__: | I expect it would be a good idea - but my wife will kill me if I volunteer |
| 14:15:07 | cholmes: | I would like some one from the java community on the board. |
| 14:15:08 | adoyle: | Schuyler, what concerns you? |
| 14:15:13 | cholmes: | I would also like an international person on the board. |
| 14:15:19 | Schuyler: | yes, me too |
| 14:15:27 | Schuyler: | and by that I don't just mean Canadian : ) |
| 14:15:32 | danmo: | lol |
| 14:15:38 | jasonbirch: | Hey... |
| 14:15:54 | iant__: | does "non-resident alien" count? |
| 14:15:55 | FrankW: | cholmes then? |
| 14:16:01 | Schuyler: | adoyle: well, I feel like the F/OSS GIS Java community is severely underrepresented at this meeting |
| 14:16:20 | Schuyler: | and since this meeting is going to be the nucleus of the membership I'm afriad the community will be underrepresented by membership |
| 14:16:24 | adoyle: | We have cholmes and iant__ |
| 14:16:29 | FrankW: | Schuyler: Then I think they need to be added aggresively in the second tranch. |
| 14:16:31 | cholmes: | Paul could also do java... |
| 14:16:32 | Schuyler: | should I bring this up?? |
| 14:16:35 | adoyle: | Sure |
| 14:17:25 | adoyle: | Schuyler makes impassioned speech about including Java community |
| 14:18:01 | Schuyler: | I keep bringing up irrelevancies at the last minute |
| 14:18:23 | jgarnett: | Aside: thanks for thinking of us guys ;- ) We *do* appricate it |
| 14:18:28 | : | * nhv waits for hobu to make an impassioned speech for including a Pythonista on the board |
| 14:18:36 | Schuyler: | Laura Rivera, John Weathersby, Brian Behlendorf and Daniel Brooksher |
| 14:18:43 | Schuyler: | are standing aside from the initial membership |
| 14:18:50 | Schuyler: | Brian is asking for nomination |
| 14:18:56 | jgarnett: | where is ruby :- ) |
| 14:19:05 | jasonbirch: | on the rails |
| 14:19:12 | jgarnett: | ( ack walked into that ) |
| 14:19:14 | adoyle: | Gary Lang - nominated |
| 14:19:21 | adoyle: | Frankw - nominated |
| 14:19:23 | hobu: | Frank Warmerdam - nominated |
| 14:19:42 | Schuyler: | Paul Ramsey, nominated but declined |
| 14:19:52 | nhv: | ack does Frank have time for this and coding |
| 14:20:02 | gsherman: | he can give up sleep |
| 14:20:02 | adoyle: | Arnulf nominated |
| 14:20:02 | jasonbirch: | clone him |
| 14:20:03 | danmo: | are we talking board or foundation members now? |
| 14:20:04 | steeler: | ausgezeichnet |
| 14:20:06 | gsherman: | its overrated anyway |
| 14:20:06 | Schuyler: | Arnulf Christl, nominated and accepted |
| 14:20:36 | Schuyler: | Tyler Mitchell, nominated and ... ? |
| 14:20:41 | gsherman: | i missed the last two |
| 14:20:41 | Schuyler: | Chris Holmes, nominated and accepted |
| 14:21:01 | Schuyler: | Tyler accepts |
| 14:21:07 | nhv: | should we allow self nominations |
| 14:21:12 | Schuyler: | ( but he seems a little reluctant ) ;- ) |
| 14:21:18 | gsherman: | gary, frank, arnulf, chris, tyler -- is that it? |
| 14:21:26 | Schuyler: | these are the initial board nominations |
| 14:21:48 | ko6yq: | if the noms stop at 5, that makes it easy |
| 14:22:04 | jgarnett: | ( thanks chris! we owe you one ) |
| 14:22:09 | Schuyler: | Markus has been nominated and seconded... did he accept? |
| 14:22:13 | adoyle: | Yes |
| 14:22:19 | nhv: | if anyone want s to be on the initial board elbow your neighbor |
| 14:22:19 | Schuyler: | David McIlhagga nominated but declined |
| 14:22:27 | jgarnett: | lol |
| 14:22:41 | hobu: | Schuyler nominated and declines |
| 14:22:45 | jgarnett: | this is always the funny part, who will sign for their supper ( or in fact ours ) |
| 14:22:48 | Schuyler: | not this year anyway :- ) |
| 14:23:18 | jgarnett: | remember don't let the coders get involved, we need them ;- ) |
| 14:23:34 | Schuyler: | jgarnett: I was thinking the same thing, but didn't want to say |
| 14:23:35 | nhv: | jgarnett++ |
| 14:23:45 | ko6yq: | but any board needs a mix |
| 14:23:53 | gsherman: | so are there 6 nominees? |
| 14:23:59 | Schuyler: | hang on a sec |
| 14:24:00 | adoyle: | weakening resolve... leaning towards 7 people and adding 4 more for 11 |
| 14:24:14 | pramsey_: | pull up! pull up! |
| 14:24:23 | Schuyler: | Michael Gerlek nominated and also accepted |
| 14:24:53 | adoyle: | Going to a vote |
| 14:25:19 | nhv: | is it 5 or 7 |
| 14:25:20 | jgarnett: | darn they should play musical chairs .... |
| 14:25:38 | danmo: | I think I heard 7 and they need to vote to get down to 5 |
| 14:25:44 | : | * gsherman is confused |
| 14:25:54 | : | * gsherman will wait for the movie : ) |
| 14:25:58 | jasonbirch: | are only members voting, or the full 25? : ) |
| 14:26:04 | jgarnett: | can someone sum up the list in once sentence please? |
| 14:26:08 | nhv: | will wait for the rerun on TV |
| 14:26:14 | adoyle: | Hang on |
| 14:26:31 | jgarnett: | did someone nominate adoyle? |
| 14:26:38 | adoyle: | Gary Lang, Markus Neteler, Frank Warmerdam |
| 14:26:43 | adoyle: | Arnulf Christl |
| 14:26:47 | adoyle: | Chris Holmes |
| 14:27:00 | adoyle: | Michael from Lizardtech |
| 14:27:27 | jasonbirch: | Did Tyler drop out? |
| 14:27:32 | adoyle: | yes |
| 14:28:04 | Schuyler: | he did? he's still up there |
| 14:28:17 | adoyle: | oh, no |
| 14:28:20 | adoyle: | hes in |
| 14:29:08 | jgarnett: | I am thinking about that lineup ... |
| 14:29:26 | pramsey_: | *Theme from Jeapardy* |
| 14:29:33 | TylerM: | I don't think I did |
| 14:29:35 | TylerM: | drop out |
| 14:29:36 | jasonbirch: | lol. |
| 14:29:46 | Schuyler: | TylerM: you looked like you wanted to, though |
| 14:29:54 | nhv: | hope someone is taking pictures |
| 14:29:58 | Schuyler: | darn I should have nominated hobu after all |
| 14:30:07 | Schuyler: | next time |
| 14:30:08 | gsherman: | TylerM, its a conspiracy -- watch out! |
| 14:30:09 | TylerM: | I'm interestd in the mob is |
| 14:30:13 | TylerM: | _if_ |
| 14:30:22 | adoyle: | There are the 4 remaining slots |
| 14:30:23 | danmo: | ? |
| 14:30:54 | Schuyler: | Brian is going off to count the votes |
| 14:30:59 | TylerM: | I mean I was initially hesitant because I'd prefer a vote |
| 14:31:07 | Schuyler: | report from the funding break out in the meantime |
| 14:31:07 | danmo: | you got it |
| 14:31:08 | TylerM: | so now i'll be happy |
| 14:31:34 | adoyle: | Funding recap now |
| 14:31:59 | Schuyler: | pramsey is presenting a big paper with lots of figures |
| 14:32:04 | Schuyler: | my eyesight is starting to blur |
| 14:32:14 | danmo: | The initial plan was 25+20 foundation members. Since there are 21 who accepted in the room, does this mean 24 or 20 more to select later? |
| 14:32:23 | Schuyler: | $5k for hardware, $20k for legal, $50k reserve |
| 14:32:24 | adoyle: | Sounds like they think we need money |
| 14:32:33 | adoyle: | danmo - good question |
| 14:32:35 | Schuyler: | is the amount of money they think the foundation will need initially |
| 14:32:46 | mpg: | Yes -- the intent is that the initial 25 can select up to enough to satisy the "at most 45" goal |
| 14:32:47 | Schuyler: | danmo: I would *assume* that 24 more are to be selected |
| 14:33:26 | danmo: | ok |
| 14:33:48 | Schuyler: | there's a list of other stuff I didn't quite follow but it all seems pretty reasonable |
| 14:34:00 | Schuyler: | some of that is outreach -- sending someone with a booth to conferences |
| 14:34:07 | jasonbirch: | It's in the IRC logs I think |
| 14:34:18 | Schuyler: | startup = $150k, plus $150 - 250k per year? |
| 14:34:44 | Schuyler: | the stated intention for now is to break even |
| 14:35:01 | hobu: | ( of the conference ) |
| 14:35:16 | Schuyler: | oh, just on the conference? |
| 14:36:17 | hobu: | "revenue neutral" applied to the conference AFAIK |
| 14:36:31 | Schuyler: | what sponsors are most looking for, according to Frank, that the projects they are supporting continue to grow and are successful |
| 14:37:44 | Schuyler: | the theory is that sponsors would be a major source of revenue but sponsors would be given the option of selecting which project they specifically want to benefit |
| 14:37:58 | Schuyler: | to the tune of 2/3 |
| 14:38:18 | Schuyler: | "so if the foundation wants to spend $200k, it has to raise $600k" |
| 14:38:23 | camerons: | For Foundation Memebership - I'd like to see at least one representative from each Project's PMC. |
| 14:38:43 | Schuyler: | camerons: that's a must, as discussed in the governance group |
| 14:38:53 | Schuyler: | the PMC representative to the board must be a member |
| 14:39:28 | mpg: | but the rest of the PMC folk need not be members ( weird, but that it how Apache does it ) |
| 14:39:38 | Schuyler: | I don't think that's weird |
| 14:39:53 | Schuyler: | for now, foundation membership implies obligation to volunteer work on behalf of the foundation |
| 14:40:10 | Schuyler: | some project developers -- most, hopefully -- will choose to focus on their projects : ) |
| 14:40:20 | camerons: | Membership should not cost anything for project PMC members also. |
| 14:40:41 | mpg: | we had some discussion of the board doing an exceptional case bless someone as Member if they were voted to be PSC rep |
| 14:40:59 | mpg: | Also, note we chose the term PSC not PMC |
| 14:41:01 | jasonbirch: | membership should not cost anything to anyone. They are already spending effort... |
| 14:41:34 | danmo: | yeah, I think we may be mixing foundation member and individual sponsor |
| 14:41:37 | mpg: | PSM == "Project/Program Steering Cmmttee" ( not sure what the P was for ) |
| 14:41:47 | mpg: | psC, sorry |
| 14:41:52 | adoyle: | Project Steering Committee |
| 14:44:25 | Schuyler: | ... ongoing discussion of financial details ... |
| 14:44:32 | mpg: | Gary is estimating .25M$ to cover our goals from the day |
| 14:44:46 | Schuyler: | they're trying to figure out how where money will come from above sponsorships |
| 14:45:30 | danmo: | we could easily raise 500$/year by selling t-shirts... ; ) |
| 14:45:41 | gsherman: | ya, thats worked well for qgis |
| 14:45:57 | mpg: | Don't forget window declas and bumper stickers |
| 14:46:01 | gsherman: | oh you said $500. i thought you meant $5 |
| 14:46:01 | mpg: | Also, PayPal donations |
| 14:46:05 | gsherman: | slipped a decimal |
| 14:46:20 | danmo: | I might as well have written 5$ |
| 14:46:38 | Schuyler: | Brian returns.... |
| 14:46:45 | adoyle: | drum roll |
| 14:46:52 | jasonbirch: | Need a cool animal like postgis' elephant if you want to sell shirts |
| 14:47:05 | mpg: | $80K for conference last year |
| 14:47:07 | gsherman: | fooey |
| 14:48:10 | Schuyler: | the argument is whether to start out large or small |
| 14:48:13 | steeler: | john weathersby says: "show me the money!" |
| 14:48:16 | mpg: | Autodesk wants to submit $250, but is fearing we are not planning large enough? |
| 14:48:17 | Schuyler: | i.e. hiring an executive director etc |
| 14:48:31 | Schuyler: | Arnulf is arguing to start small and sustainable |
| 14:48:38 | Schuyler: | Gary is arguing to start big to stay big |
| 14:48:45 | jasonbirch: | go too large and risk relying on big corporate sponsorship to continue |
| 14:48:52 | mpg: | John cautioning we need to be careful to take Gary's $ |
| 14:49:03 | jasonbirch: | is autodesk willing to commit multi-year? |
| 14:49:38 | Schuyler: | "it depends" |
| 14:50:51 | mpg: | Use $250 as match fund. suggests John |
| 14:51:45 | jasonbirch: | It needs a kick-start, I'm not sure that will be able to attract that kind of funds ongoing until prooves itself |
| 14:51:55 | Schuyler: | okay, new board members of the OSGEo Foundation are: |
| 14:52:09 | Schuyler: | Arnulf, Frank, Gary, Chris and Markus |
| 14:52:17 | : | * TylerM 's Wife sighs in relief |
| 14:52:32 | : | * Schuyler pats TylerM on the back |
| 14:52:33 | : | * mpg thanks whoever nominated me |
| 14:52:41 | Schuyler: | don't worry, we'll nominate you both again : ) |
| 14:53:02 | : | * markusN mine too |
| 14:53:22 | Schuyler: | Rich Steele reporting on the legal discussion |
| 14:53:34 | Schuyler: | the biggest concern is loss of control over a project's code |
| 14:53:44 | Schuyler: | but after all forking is the ultimate protection of open source |
| 14:53:59 | Schuyler: | copyright assignment has pros and cons |
| 14:54:44 | Schuyler: | the three assignment options were discussed in #osgeo-legal but I'll recap them in anyone wants |
| 14:55:20 | Schuyler: | suffice it to say that the foundation will probably support all three, but prefer sharing joint ownership in software copyright with the developer |
| 14:55:46 | Schuyler: | which guarantees the developer the right to relicense the code but the foundation the right to enforce the license through litigation |
| 14:56:04 | garylang__: | Schuyller - will want recap for notes |
| 14:56:28 | Schuyler: | I believe there's a log of the IRC discussion |
| 14:57:01 | nhv: | sere the groups irc sessions logged ? |
| 14:57:07 | gsherman: | http://logs.qgis.org/osgeo-legal/ |
| 14:57:08 | sigq: | Title: Index of /osgeo-legal ( at logs.qgis.org ) |
| 14:57:19 | nhv: | nice thx |
| 14:58:45 | Schuyler: | thanks gsherman |
| 14:59:05 | Schuyler: | the relicensing-after-assignment issue is problematic |
| 14:59:09 | gsherman: | no problem |
| 14:59:21 | Schuyler: | if a BSD-licensed project is assigned to the foundation, and then relicensed to GPL, or vice versa |
| 14:59:47 | Schuyler: | the consensus was that we hope the foundation will act in a cooperative spirit with the contributing developer |
| 14:59:51 | jasonbirch: | if it's a joint assignment and the foundation adopts a statute? to not re-license, then it should be OK? |
| 15:00:08 | Schuyler: | jasonbirch: there are good reasons to leave the door open to that. |
| 15:00:40 | Schuyler: | such as, if legal problems emerge with an existing license |
| 15:01:47 | : | * nhv reminds everyone only 30 minutes left in original aggenda's schedule |
| 15:02:01 | Schuyler: | finally, incubation has a legal component, namely ensuring the legal unencumbrance of the project's code base |
| 15:02:18 | Schuyler: | the board will need to decide what level of risk to take on |
| 15:02:59 | camerons: | The key issue I've heard from developers is that they don't want someone to make money from selling their code. Address this issue and you will attract more developers. |
| 15:03:16 | mpg: | Gary: "No, no, this legal stuff is really interesting." |
| 15:03:51 | mpg: | Rich describing a decent middle road approach |
| 15:04:03 | Schuyler: | we have to be flexible to be inclusive |
| 15:04:50 | : | * adoyle wishes to note that he is impressed with this entire meeting, it's participants and its output. This is fantastic stuff. |
| 15:04:59 | Schuyler: | +inf |
| 15:05:10 | nhv: | ++ |
| 15:05:29 | Schuyler: | ( or +MAXINT if you prefer ) |
| 15:06:12 | mpg: | Rich: app-level stuff has different spirit of license reqments than library-level |
| 15:08:07 | hobu: | mpg: cholmes said that I think... |
| 15:08:25 | Schuyler: | general consensus seems to be that license selection has to be the choice of the PSC |
| 15:08:38 | Schuyler: | foundation should prefer LGPL or MIT for library code |
| 15:08:45 | Schuyler: | so that it can be reused |
| 15:09:40 | : | * brian_b has bad news for any open source developer, under any license, who wants to prevent others from making money "off" of their code |
| 15:11:05 | brian_b: | D&O insurance is important |
| 15:11:07 | Schuyler: | also, the board will need to decide how much to indemnify directors / officers |
| 15:11:11 | brian_b: | Apache went years without it, but at significant risk |
| 15:11:14 | brian_b: | it kept me up at night |
| 15:11:20 | brian_b: | that and lack of backups, but you didn't hear me say that |
| 15:11:36 | Schuyler: | brian_b: is director & office insurance expensive? |
| 15:11:40 | mpg: | How much $ are we talking ? |
| 15:11:40 | Schuyler: | er, officer |
| 15:11:48 | Tim_B: | D&O insurance? |
| 15:11:51 | brian_b: | I believe Apache has finally gotten it but I don't know how much it cost |
| 15:11:59 | Schuyler: | Tyler is now discussing the community breakout |
| 15:12:02 | mpg: | order of magnitude guess? |
| 15:12:18 | Schuyler: | mpg: adoyle seemed to think it could be in the low thousands annually |
| 15:12:18 | brian_b: | Tim_B: Directors and Officers insurance is to protect the officers from personal liability in the actions of the non-profit |
| 15:12:26 | brian_b: | it should be in the low thousands |
| 15:12:33 | mpg: | ok, thanks |
| 15:12:53 | nhv: | we should have a distributed repository but with devs working out of CVS/SVN code is in essenced backed up |
| 15:12:56 | brian_b: | it'll never protect against malicious action, and probably won't protect against ignorance |
| 15:13:01 | Schuyler: | Tyler "we should help users help themselves" |
| 15:13:08 | brian_b: | which is why a crash course in non-profit administration law is probably a good idea |
| 15:16:52 | adoyle: | collabnet to be the initial hosting operation for osgeo.org's code base |
| 15:17:10 | nhv: | great |
| 15:17:23 | gsherman: | code base == project code?? |
| 15:17:34 | Schuyler: | code BASES |
| 15:18:15 | hobu: | adoyle: *could* be... I imagine subdomains... mapserver.osgeo.org, ossim.osgeo.org, etc pointing ( or proxying ) to existing projects for the short time |
| 15:18:32 | adoyle: | right. So who's joining, anyway? Projects, I mean. |
| 15:18:49 | jgarnett: | adoyle++ |
| 15:19:08 | Schuyler: | so the Foundation will have a project consolidation plan |
| 15:19:11 | seang: | do products go directly in, or is there to be incubation? |
| 15:19:17 | seang: | yo |
| 15:19:24 | Schuyler: | hi seang |
| 15:19:25 | seang: | projects, i meant |
| 15:19:32 | mpg: | Brian and I didn't describe but: |
| 15:19:41 | mpg: | the plan is projects to self-nominate after |
| 15:19:43 | adoyle: | I would throw in basicwms.py but it might not meet the incubator requirements : ) |
| 15:19:48 | brian_b: | hobu: with collabnet's system we have a domain ( e.g. 'dev.osgeo.org' ) and then each project gets a hostname ( 'ossim.dev.osgeo.org' or something ) |
| 15:20:01 | hobu: | brian_b: sure |
| 15:20:01 | brian_b: | we could even have the domain be osgeo.org, where the projects get ossim.osgeo.org, etc |
| 15:20:02 | ko6yq: | CollabNet's software can host separate projects side-by-side |
| 15:20:04 | mpg: | the interim board fully up and running; expected to bypass incubator, but will need IP check, etc |
| 15:20:05 | Schuyler: | Phase 1 will involve coming up with a plan, picking out platforms, agreeing on the details |
| 15:20:24 | Schuyler: | hobu's hard work on ms.gis.umn.edu will be preserved |
| 15:20:28 | brian_b: | we use * A records, which means you can define more specific hosts that go elsewhere |
| 15:20:35 | hobu: | brian_b: I just don't imaging joining projects swapping over theor repositories next week ; ) |
| 15:20:57 | brian_b: | so you could have mapserver.osgeo.org go to a separate host first, and then transitioned over |
| 15:21:08 | Schuyler: | in general project consolidation will be deferred until projects are ready |
| 15:21:16 | brian_b: | hobu: neither do I, there will definitely be a trial and migration period |
| 15:21:35 | hobu: | it took Mapserver 2 years to move to a content management system.... |
| 15:21:46 | brian_b: | I also don't see a problem with continuing to use Jira for certain projects alongside CollabNet |
| 15:21:50 | steeler: | is leaving for the airport. thanks everyone. great work! |
| 15:22:07 | seang: | so there's no incubation? tried and true, brand new untried software, everyone starts out equal? |
| 15:22:23 | mpg: | seang: board need not accept project |
| 15:22:30 | adoyle: | no incubator for the initial phase |
| 15:22:42 | adoyle: | interim board to define the rules |
| 15:22:44 | jgarnett: | projects do arrive with a reputation after all |
| 15:22:56 | mpg: | +1 initial projects |
| 15:23:12 | danmo: | something was said about reverse-engineering the rules from the commonalities between the founding projects |
| 15:23:33 | seang: | cool |
| 15:23:38 | mpg: | cholmes mentions supporting multiple databses to test against |
| 15:23:48 | seang: | gotta preserve the good thing we already have going |
| 15:23:51 | mpg: | ( he used the SDE word too ) |
| 15:24:32 | : | * hobu wants a build and nightly test farm ( not every architecture, but at least cover some of it ) |
| 15:24:45 | mpg: | hobu: no you don't :- ) |
| 15:24:46 | hobu: | I've done some of this myself with mapserver. It is not pleasant |
| 15:25:16 | Schuyler: | smoke testing |
| 15:25:17 | mpg: | I do it at LizardTech -- fun, but tiresome |
| 15:25:24 | Schuyler: | that's a resource we can share |
| 15:25:28 | mpg: | +1 nightly builds and archives |
| 15:25:47 | Schuyler: | any comments from IRC?? |
| 15:26:07 | bobbray: | We do that at autodesk as well. Plan to post the results to the CollabNet site. |
| 15:26:23 | Schuyler: | committed initial candidate projects will be... |
| 15:26:43 | Schuyler: | MapGuide, Mapbender, GDAL/OGR, GRASS ( Markus: "why not?" ) |
| 15:27:02 | gsherman: | is this an "official" list? |
| 15:27:08 | adoyle: | For now. |
| 15:27:29 | Schuyler: | the MapServer community still needs to decide if it will participate |
| 15:27:32 | jgarnett: | + nightly builds |
| 15:27:37 | adoyle: | GeoTools, MapServer leaning towards but have to run their own process |
| 15:27:39 | camerons: | Where do other projects ( like Mapbuilder ) stand? |
| 15:27:42 | Schuyler: | but Tom and Frank have put forward a process |
| 15:27:49 | danmo: | What's blocking MapServer? Ah yea, that community thing |
| 15:28:06 | arnulf: | Mapbuilder is in, I think. At least it is proposed. |
| 15:28:14 | gsherman: | so does that mean MapGuide, Mapbender, GDAL/OGR, GRASS are in the foundation, or up for consideration? |
| 15:28:20 | gsherman: | sorry for being thick |
| 15:28:22 | markusN: | I have to add that the GRASS community needs to be heard as well ( but there was already positive feedback ) |
| 15:28:24 | garylang__: | in |
| 15:28:28 | Schuyler: | Chris has put out a call for "AJAX client convergence" : ) |
| 15:28:37 | Schuyler: | which was seconded by me and Dave McIlhagga |
| 15:28:44 | jgarnett: | good luck chris ;- ) |
| 15:28:47 | pramsey_: | Like desktop software convergence : ) |
| 15:28:50 | mpg: | Up for consideration technically -- but a shoo-in for actual acceptance |
| 15:29:05 | gsherman: | thanks |
| 15:29:12 | Schuyler: | Tyler is reminding us that we talked seriously this morning about supporting open geodata efforts |
| 15:29:29 | : | * nhv believes that healthy communities are diverse |
| 15:29:30 | Schuyler: | he names EOGEO and Free Earth Foundation as other organizations that OSGeo can support |
| 15:29:32 | jgarnett: | akak "show me the data" ;- ) |
| 15:29:53 | Schuyler: | adoyle volunteers to serve as the Free Geodata Liason |
| 15:29:53 | mpg: | OSSIM is in! |
| 15:30:11 | nhv: | that's jsut awesome |
| 15:30:24 | Schuyler: | gsherman: will QGIS sign up? |
| 15:30:25 | gsherman: | ossim in foundation? |
| 15:30:36 | adoyle: | yes |
| 15:30:39 | gsherman: | qgis will wait and see |
| 15:30:44 | gsherman: | we have a process : ) |
| 15:30:52 | Schuyler: | excellent |
| 15:31:16 | arnulf: | mapbuilder is not on the list now. Shall we add it? |
| 15:31:18 | hobu: | mapserver and geotools have process to go through too |
| 15:31:40 | jgarnett: | good old open development - we can't do quick answers |
| 15:32:01 | jack_e_chan: | arnulf: Sure, why not? |
| 15:32:25 | jgarnett: | here is something the foundation can do for all of us right now, a nice little package ( wiki page? ) that we can present to our development communities. |
| 15:32:31 | arnulf: | OK, MapBuilder is on the list now. |
| 15:33:37 | gsherman: | just to be clear, intial projects entering the foundation are: MapGuide, Mapbender, GDAL/OGR, GRASS, OSSIM, Mapbuilder -- correct?? |
| 15:33:44 | adoyle: | I think it's important that we publish "official" lists of ( a ) members, ( b ) directors, and ( c ) projects asap. |
| 15:34:02 | Schuyler: | so we're winding up |
| 15:34:21 | Schuyler: | we agreed on a name, a board, some initial projects, and guidelines on how to proceed |
| 15:34:28 | : | * gsherman awaits confirmation of the project list before he spams the world with it |
| 15:34:42 | brian_b: | Good bye all, this was fun! |
| 15:34:43 | Schuyler: | the question of what projects do next is deferred until the board can get geared up |
| 15:34:59 | jasonbirch: | Not PROJ.4? |
| 15:35:01 | jack_e_chan: | Cheers, brian_b |
| 15:35:29 | danmo: | Will MapServer have the option to be one of the founding projects if we can get our act together and decide ASAP? |
| 15:35:43 | Schuyler: | danmo: that would be the presumption |
| 15:35:44 | hobu: | danmo: AFAIK, yes |
| 15:35:48 | TylerM: | danmo you have time until board get a process in place |
| 15:35:49 | hobu: | two weeks... |
| 15:35:50 | jgarnett: | I would assume so |
| 15:36:12 | danmo: | I can't believe MapServer was the first project involved and may be last to join |
| 15:36:31 | FrankW: | Just the last of the first! |
| 15:36:48 | mpg: | The Mercator Foundation kickoff is in Seattle on Monday.. :- ) |
| 15:36:51 | TylerM: | danmo: thanks for the help getting stuff on site |
| 15:37:02 | arnulf: | #geofoundation |
| 15:37:04 | nhv: | great job everyone !! |
| 15:37:06 | TylerM: | hi all, btw : ) |
| 15:37:09 | markusN: | thanks |
| 15:37:11 | FrankW: | Woot! |
| 15:37:13 | danmo: | TylerM: np. BTW, are you the maintainer of the attendees list in ocs? |
| 15:37:17 | adoyle: | w00t |
| 15:37:19 | TylerM: | heh - no |
| 15:37:20 | : | * ko6yq waves thx |
| 15:37:22 | danmo: | ( in docs ) |
| 15:37:25 | TylerM: | Lauara must have given it to Fred |
| 15:37:38 | : | * gsherman prepares to blog his review of the meeting |
| 15:37:41 | TylerM: | or something.. |
| 15:37:47 | danmo: | it's not accurate. can someone please get an accurate list of attendees and send to Fred? |
| 15:37:59 | TylerM: | I'll ask laura |
| 15:38:02 | danmo: | thx |
| 15:38:03 | jasonbirch: | Pretty amazing the amout of stuff that actually got covered in one day... |
| 15:38:13 | TylerM: | Pretty amazing group : ) |
| 15:38:24 | danmo: | I'm impressed... slow start, but quite a lot done in teh afternoon |
| 15:38:24 | nhv: | yes and keeping to the schedule amazing :- ) |
| 15:39:02 | jgarnett: | nice job everyone, happy hacking |
| 15:39:26 | TylerM: | night all : ) |
| 15:39:32 | TylerM: | may come back later |
| 15:39:37 | mpg: | Thanks all! |
| 15:39:39 | : | * TylerM hangs up |
| 15:39:58 | gsherman: | Schuyler, thanks for your efforts in transcription |
| 15:40:15 | danmo: | gsherman++ |
| 15:40:16 | ko6yq: | yeah, that made all the difference here in IRCland |
| 15:40:20 | camerons: | Yes, thanks Schuyler. |
| 15:40:35 | nhv: | combination of phone and IRC worked well I almost feel as if I ws there |
| 15:40:46 | adoyle: | nhv wasn't here? |
| 15:40:58 | Schuyler: | my pleasure |
| 15:41:28 | Schuyler: | thank you all for taking the time to participate virtually |
| 15:42:49 | hobu: | thank you Schuyler for being such a prolific scribe |
| 15:43:31 | jack_e_chan: | Thanks everyone for participating and specially to Schuyler for transcribing! |
| 15:43:51 | : | * hobu goes to find beer |
| 16:14:36 | gsherman: | whew... |