Download as PDF, PPTX
Uploaded byJody Garnett
Foundation Comparison
The document discusses the roles and activities of the Open Source Geospatial Foundation (OSGeo) and LocationTech, emphasizing their collaborative efforts in promoting open source geospatial technologies. It highlights the structure, incubation processes, and community engagement initiatives of both organizations, along with specific project examples. The text also addresses challenges faced during project development and outlines the benefits of participation in both foundations.
More Related Content
Foundation Comparison
- 1. Supporting FOSS4G Comparison ofOSGeo and LocationTech
- 2. Comparison of OSGeo andLocationTech Supporting FOSS4G
- 3. Welcome 3 Jody Garnett Technical Lead jgarnett@boundlessgeo.com @jodygarnett OpenSource Geospatial Foundation OSGeo Incubation Chair GeoTools Project Officer Eclipse Foundation LocationTech Project Steering Committee LocationTech Technology Project Boundless Boundless provides geospatial tools and services for managing data and building applications. Open Source Projects GeoTools GeoServer uDig
- 4.
- 5. Preflight (Focused on theComparison)
- 6. Motivation forTalk • A"lively" discussion on discuss@osgeo.org: • Why is FOSS4G NA co-hosted? • Who is LocationTech? • What is plan? • Eclipse members wondering who we are: • What is FOSS4G • Who is OSGeo? • What is the plan?
- 7. FOSS4G • Free andOpen Source Software for Geomatics! • Banner/Brand for a series of world wide conferences • FOSS4G-NA is the regional conference for North America • Co-hosted this year to reduce effort
- 8.
- 9. LocationTech “Loca&onTech is a working group developing advanced loca&on aware technologies.” Eclipse is a community for individuals and organiza&ons who wish to collaborate on commercially-‐friendly open source soAware. Not-‐for-‐profit, member supported corpora&on. 9
- 10. Working Groups Advanced GeospatialSoftware Internet of ThingsLong Term Support Embedded Systems Vendor neutral collaboration: ★265+ projects ★~1100 active devs ★205+ members ★9M+ users ★ Scientific Research 10
- 11. Full Service Foundation Forge & Build IP mgmt Dev Process Licensing Model Community Member Network Governance Runby: Follows Eclipse Development Processes & IP Management 11
- 12.
- 13. Membership 13 Strategic Member Participant Member Committer Guest Steering CommitteeX Elected Elected Invited Architecture Committee X Elected Elected Invited Marketing Committee X Elected Elected Invited Collaboration infrastructure X X X X IP Due diligence X X X X Code repositories write access - - X - LTS Build Infrastructure X - - - LTS binary releases X - - -
- 14. Structure Libraries Applications Processing 14 Technology GeoJinni GeoMesa (GeoWave) Geoff uDig MobileMapTechnology GeoGig GeoScript JTS libspatialindex Spatial4j uDig (SFCurve)
- 15. Excellent: Public Outreach •Great public outreach and community spirit • Loca%onTech Tour: • Similar "reach" to FOSS4G (but split up over ci%es). • Any spa%al projects are welcome. • Now entering its third year • Easy collabora%on (OGC, OSGeo, etc... ) 15
- 16. 6 cities By thenumbers ★ 723 registrations ★ 640+ attendees ★ 56 speakers ★ Videos on YouTube ★ Positive feedback 16 Tour 2013
- 17. 3 continents http://tour.locationtech.org ★ Sponsorship: $2Kmembers $4.5K non-members 17 Tour 2014
- 18. Excellent: Eclipse Staff •Experienced in introducing teams to open source • In posi%on to take on "thankless" tasks • Trademark check • IP Check • Step up as mentor • Special thanks to Andrew, Sharon and Mike 18
- 19. Caution: New toEclipse • Loca%onTech is new to the Eclipse Founda%on • Not always sure how the infrastructure works yet (use of "portal" for commiPer nomina%on) • While each project has a couple of mentors, we have ended up relying on eclipse staff for direc%on • Incuba%on process is a lot of work • IP Team available to do the hard part (but you need to submit code and dependencies) • Introducing Eclipse to a new industry • GIS standards like EPSG require an introduc%on 19
- 20. Trouble • With so many new projects • Ask projects to depend on the same version • Form an incuba%on queue • Incuba%ng a moving target • Dependencies change before review is finished 20
- 21. OSGeo Open Source GeospatialFoundation
- 23. OSGeo Mission: Support thecollaborative development of open source geospatial software, and promote its widespread use. • Non-Profit,Vendor Neutral • International • Open Education, Open Data
- 24. Members • Board • 9individuals - elected by charter members • Charter Members • 244 individuals - more nominated yearly • Members • volunteer organization - everyone welcome
- 25. OSGeo for NewProjects • OSGeo Foundation offers new spatial projects • A community of your peers • People who understand you! • Great cross project code sprints • Assistance in building community • Marketting and Outreach • Incubation to help with Open Development
- 26. How OSGeo Protects •Foundation offer limited protection: • Incubation review provides an opportunity to publicly state your code is in the clear. • OSGeo has healthy body of prior art • This is an area of collaboration with other foundations: • Our focus is on fostering spatial software and promoting use • We are not a strict “IP” machine
- 27. Spatial Experts • OSGeohas a range of mapping experts • Helpful, engaging and educational • Great for collaboration on tough problems • Developers can help translate “expert” advice
- 28. Participation • OSGeo participationis free • Sign up to an email list or committee and get involved • Charter members are nominated yearly • Board members are voted on by Charter members
- 29.
- 30. Excellent: Public Outreach •Great public outreach and community spirit • Any spatial projects are welcome (no need to join) • Easy collaborate (OGC, LocationTech, etc... )
- 31.
- 32. Excellent: Flexibility • Flexibleand Responsive to Project needs • Migrating from hosted svn to github • Public communication and transparency
- 33. Caution • OSGeo isso helpful to projects • ... that there is not much incentive to join! • Projects entering incubation • Get an immediate brand recognition boost ... and have little motivation to finish • Public communication is not suitable for all occasions
- 34. Trouble • Great forestablished open source projects but ... • No clear guidance on how to start doing open-source • Projects waiting years to get in (stuck on volunteers willing to "mentor")
- 35.
- 36. OSGeo Application • Straightforward application • name, project, license, copyright, etc... • how many users, types of users? • 1-6 year response time
- 37. Project Proposal • Straight forward applica%on • background, scope, license, legal issues .. • why here, project scheduling, future work • TM Check • Quick response %me 37
- 38. OSGeo Incubation • License:AnyOSI Approved License, doc license • Community: "Active and healthy" • Source Code: please perform a manual check • Dependencies: provide a list along with license • List copyright holders / or collect contribution agreement • Process: version control, issue tracker, docs, releases • Governance: decide in public and how to take part
- 39.
- 40. LocationTech Incubation • License: EPL, MIT, BSD, Apache • Trademark: checked and assigned to founda%on • Source code: checked by IP team (each release) • Dependencies: source code checked by IP team • Contributors: listed on portal, contributor license • Process: • opening up to use of github, external issue trackers • common processes automated on portal • Governance: • clear lines of communica%on, oXen automated 40
- 41.
- 42. Result is BugzillaTicket 42
- 43. LocationTech Incubation facts, figuresand feedback
- 44. uDig • February 2013 • uDig project "crea%on review" • March 2013 • Code Review started • July 2013 • Code Review issues resolved • Feb 2015 • GitHub Repository created (ini%al checkin) • Ongoing • SubmiPed 52 IP %ckets (out of 172) 44
- 45. uDig Feedback • We are enthusias%c (yay Eclipse RCP!) • We also started early • Glad arrangements made for github hos%ng • Got stuck on two key issues • JAI • EPSG -‐ open data license from 1974 • Wai%ng while other (smaller) projects go through dependencies 45
- 46. GeoMesa • October 2013 • GeoMesa project "crea%on review" • November 2013 • Code Review started of (GeoMesa codebase) • 2014 • GitHub Repository created (ini%al checkin) • Ongoing • Dependency Review • SubmiPed 125 IP %ckets 46
- 47. GeoGig • February 2013 • uDig project "crea%on review" • March 2013 • Code Review started • July 2013 • Code Review issues resolved • Feb 2015 • GitHub Repository created (ini%al checkin) • Ongoing • SubmiPed 45 IP %ckets 47
- 48. GeoGig Feedback • A few glitches • vecmath (not open source) • name change (tm check) • We are ready: • A 1.0 product wai%ng to release 48
- 49. OSGeo Incubation facts, figuresand feedback
- 50. GeoTools • 2006 • GeoToolsenters incubation, Initial Code Review (Jody) • 2007 • Asked OSGeo to hold copyright • 2008 • Second code review (Adrian) • Graduation, with 13 known issues (better than unknown!)
- 51. GeoTools Feedback • RemovedArcSDE Jars (distribution terms) • Removed Oracle JDBC driver (distribution terms) • Confirmed distribution of derivative EPSG database (hsql) • Headers: GeoTools PMC --> OSGeo Foundation • Where test case data originated from? • Questions about a few specific headers
- 52. GeoServer • 2009 • GeoServerenters incubation • Prompt initial code review • Nov 2012 - foss4g.au sprint • issues resolved two weeks later • March 2013 • graduation
- 53. GeoServer Feedback • Initialinterest driven by marketing, no follow up for the work • Hard to justify participation to employer • Workparty of foss4g-au volunteers, issues resolved two weeks later • Fixed a number of issues from license conflicts to sample data
- 54. OSGeo Incubation Update! •istSOS (2015) • rasdaman (2013-present) • OTB (2013-present) • gvSIG (2007-present) • MetaCRS (2008-present) • Opticks (2012-present) • ZOO-Project (2012-present)
- 55. • PyWPS (2009) •Geo-meteo(2009) • OSM DistributedTile Update System (2010) • MapProxy (2012) • GisClient (2012) OSGeo Applicants
- 56. OSGeo "Labs" • Geoinformatica •pgRouting • PAGC • MapProxy • pycsw • The SurveyOS KMLToolkit • SlitherGrid
- 57. So what isthe plan
- 59. Looking Ahead • OSGeoand LocationTech share a similar mandate to promote open source spatial technologies • The organizations complement each other (and are attracting different participants) • Projects can happily belong to both • There is lots of work to do ... lets go!
- 60. Contact OSGeo Help welcome newprojects! volunteer today http://www.osgeo.org/incubator http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator
- 61. Contact info@locationtech.org @locationtech We are growingfast & need your ideas & participation http://locationtech.org and click LEARN MORE Contact Loca%onTech 61
- 62. Upcoming Events • http://2015.foss4g.org •https://2015.foss4g-na.org (done!) • http://europe.foss4g.org/2015/ • http://tour.locationtech.org/2015/
- 63.
- 64.
- 65.
- 66.
- 67. Q & A •Q: How long does it take to submit a dependency for review? A: (Tyler) 5 mins if everything is straightforward or 15 mins for the worst case.
- 68. +1 0 -‐1 Sign in: 2015.foss4g-‐na.org/ Evaluate the sessions