[Osmf-talk] OSM and OSMF - How do we (want to) operate?

[Mikel Maron]

Ah yes strategic working group. RIP
I helped start the SWG, and have had much the same feeling of not meeting its goals. However I recently looked back at the minutes, and what it did accomplish, and a fair bit did move. Was productive for a time. But yes, SWG did not solve the issue (if it is in fact an issue) of OSM being a glorious mess.
In any case, I encourage us to think creatively about where OSM is at and where to go. Let’s not snuff out any ideas before there’s a chance to let them breath.
Wolfgang has identified some root causes, and some good ideas of local group discussion percolating into in person gathering at SotM. Whether a WG is the best vehicle is indeed an open question. 
Mikel

On Thursday, May 16, 2019, 5:40 PM, Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch> wrote:

Once upon a time there was the "SWG" (Strategic Working Group)  which at
least started off
(https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes/SWG_2011-08-05)
with similar goals as your suggested group. I don't think anybody would
claim that the SWG was an overwhelming success, any renewed effort would
have to make a good case why it would be different this time around and
why a WG is a good vehicle for such an undertaking.

Simon

Am 16.05.2019 um 22:58 schrieb Wolfgang Zenker:
> Both in OSM (the community) and the OSMF (the membership association) we
> often see discussions that do not lead to any useful results. While this
> might be because the topic has strong arguments on multiple sides of the
> debate, at other times it might be because we (the community and the
> OSMF) have not really discussed how we want to operate, how we want to
> make decisions or if we should make decisions at all, what goals we
> share (if any), and who should be accountable to whom for what.
> Our current structures are as far as I see born out of ad-hoc decisions
> of what appeared appropriate or convenient at a time, or what was
> necessary for legal or technical reasons. It might well be that we want
> to continue with the structures we have now, or we might find that the
> structures we have are no longer a good fit for the OSM ecosystem of
> today. Whichever way we go should be an conscious decision, I think. 
>
> Not everyone will be interested in this of course, many will be content
> with just mapping their part of the world or developing software. But
> for those interested in going forward with ideas of how OSM and the OSMF
> are or should be organized, I suggest to start discussions in local user
> groups, on this or other mailing list and if sufficient interest exists,
> to meet at the next SOTM and start an "organization working group". The
> decision we would need to make for that is, what mandate to give to that
> working group and to whom it should be accountable and deliver its
> results.
>
> Greetings,
> Wolfgang
> ( lyx @ osm )
>
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
_______________________________________________
osmf-talk mailing list
osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20190516/a5d4c541/attachment.html>