We have two great organisations hosting FOSS4G this year: The Open Source Geospatial Foundation and LocationTech. Putting on a great event is not the primary responsibility of these software foundations - supporting our great open source software is! This talk will introduce OSGeo and LocationTech, and balance the tricky topic of comparison for those interested in what each organisation offers and identifying possibilities for collaboration. Each of these software foundations has an “incubation” process setup to onboard new projects. This incubation process matches the organization's priorities and will address many factors important to you, and few ideas you may not of considered yet. This talks draws the incubation experience of: * GeoServer (OSGeo), GeoTools (OSGeo), * GeoGig (LocationTech), uDig (LocationTech) If you are an open source developer interested in joining a foundation we will cover some of the resource, marking and infrastructure benefits that may be a factor for consideration. We will also looking into some of the long term benefits a software foundation provides both you and importantly users of your software. If you are a team members faced with the difficult choice of selecting open source technologies this talk can help. We can learn a lot about the risks associated with open source based on how each foundation seeks to protect you. The factors a software foundation considers for its projects provide useful criteria you can use to evaluate any projects.

1. Supporting FOSS4G
Comparison of OSGeo and LocationTech

2. Comparison of
OSGeo and LocationTech
Supporting
FOSS4G

3. Welcome
3
Jody Garnett
Technical Lead
jgarnett@boundlessgeo.com
@jodygarnett
Open Source 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. 4
GeoGig

5. Preflight
(Focused on the Comparison)

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 and Open 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. 8
Loca%onTech

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 Geospatial Software
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
Run by:
Follows Eclipse Development
Processes & IP Management
11

12. 12
LocationTech Members
Strategic
Participating
Guest

13. Membership
13
Strategic
Member
Participant
Member
Committer Guest
Steering Committee X 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
Mobile MapTechnology
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 the numbers
★ 723 registrations
★ 640+ attendees
★ 56 speakers
★ Videos on YouTube
★ Positive feedback
16
Tour 2013

17. 3 continents
http://tour.locationtech.org
★ Sponsorship:
$2K members
$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 to Eclipse
• 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 Geospatial Foundation

23. OSGeo
Mission: Support the collaborative
development of open source
geospatial software, and promote
its widespread use.
• Non-Profit,Vendor Neutral
• International
• Open Education, Open Data

24. Members
• Board
• 9 individuals - elected by charter members
• Charter Members
• 244 individuals - more nominated yearly
• Members
• volunteer organization - everyone welcome

25. OSGeo for New Projects
• 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
• OSGeo has a range of mapping experts
• Helpful, engaging and educational
• Great for collaboration on tough problems
• Developers can help translate “expert” advice

28. Participation
• OSGeo participation is 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. Sponsors

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. Excellent: Community Building

32. Excellent: Flexibility
• Flexible and Responsive to Project needs
• Migrating from hosted svn to github
• Public communication and transparency

33. Caution
• OSGeo is so 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 for established 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. Incubation Comparison

36. OSGeo Application
• Straight forward 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:Any OSI 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. pycsw review

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. IP Review
41

42. Result is Bugzilla Ticket
42

43. LocationTech Incubation
facts, figures and 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, figures and feedback

50. GeoTools
• 2006
• GeoTools enters 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
• Removed ArcSDE 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
• GeoServer enters incubation
• Prompt initial code review
• Nov 2012 - foss4g.au sprint
• issues resolved two weeks later
• March 2013
• graduation

53. GeoServer Feedback
• Initial interest 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 is the plan

59. Looking Ahead
• OSGeo and 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
new projects!
volunteer today
http://www.osgeo.org/incubator
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/incubator

61. Contact
info@locationtech.org
@locationtech
We are growing fast & 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. http://2015.foss4g.org

64. http://europe.foss4g.org/2015/

65. http://tour.locationtech.org/2015/
65

66. Question and Answer

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