Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?

[Andreas Hocevar]

> On 18 Oct 2015, at 12:34, Angelos Tzotsos  wrote:
> 
> It is true that GitHub is not Free Software, so IMO we should not be 
> depending on it. I see the ethical issues that arise from using a non Free 
> provider and it is not the only case in our ecosystem eg. Transifex used to 
> be Free Software and it is not anymore:

This is quite an inaccurate statement, and a different story too. You could 
still go to https://github.com/transifex/transifex, clone the repo, set up a 
Transifex instance on your server, or even continue developing it. It's GPL 
licensed after all.

But that's not my point. My point is:

git is free and open source. GitHub "just" adds (tons of) convenience on top of 
it. Github going away is just as (un)likely as OSGeo going away. If that 
happens, with git being a distributed versioning system, developers will still 
be able to push their local clones to some other infrastructure. Doing so is a 
matter of 1 minute.

Andreas. 
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?

[David Fawcett]

One thing to consider in using GitHub is the opportunity for the project to
be discovered by people who are not aware of OSGEO and the geo space.

David.

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Andreas Hocevar 
wrote:

>
> > On 18 Oct 2015, at 12:34, Angelos Tzotsos  wrote:
> >
> > It is true that GitHub is not Free Software, so IMO we should not be
> depending on it. I see the ethical issues that arise from using a non Free
> provider and it is not the only case in our ecosystem eg. Transifex used to
> be Free Software and it is not anymore:
>
> This is quite an inaccurate statement, and a different story too. You
> could still go to https://github.com/transifex/transifex, clone the repo,
> set up a Transifex instance on your server, or even continue developing it.
> It's GPL licensed after all.
>
> But that's not my point. My point is:
>
> git is free and open source. GitHub "just" adds (tons of) convenience on
> top of it. Github going away is just as (un)likely as OSGeo going away. If
> that happens, with git being a distributed versioning system, developers
> will still be able to push their local clones to some other infrastructure.
> Doing so is a matter of 1 minute.
>
> Andreas.
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [OSGeo-Standards] sponsoring / relevance / standard

[Scott Simmons]

Hi Henrique,

Cameron has raised a very good point: we in the OGC need some interest from our 
members to start movement on a new standard. Perhaps you would be willing to 
brief OGC membership on your ideas and/or identify some “champions” inside the 
OGC who might start discussing the topic?

If I understand your message correctly, you have some interest in standardizing 
your convention. One important factor for OGC would be completely free access 
to the standard for the general public. Could this work within your licensing 
model?

Thanks and Regards,
Scott

Scott Simmons
Executive Director, Standards Program
Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC)
tel +1 970 682 1922
mob +1 970 214 9467
ssimm...@opengeospatial.org 

The OGC: Making Location Count…
www.opengeospatial.org 




> On Oct 18, 2015, at 1:34 PM, Cameron Shorter  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Henrique,
> It sounds like you are looking to build a ground swell of usage of a spatial 
> encoding system. This is a difficult task, and not something that OSGeo or 
> OGC processes are set up for.
> 
> First there needs to be a number of users all calling out for this standard, 
> then OGC will help these users work together to formalise the standard, then 
> software will start getting written to support the standard, then OSGeo will 
> help with branding this software as quality software. (I'm grossly 
> simplifying).
> 
> The very hard part, which I think is your challenge, is to build a ground 
> swell of people calling out for this standard. I wish you luck, but I think 
> it will be a hard.
> 
> Cameron
> 
> On 18/10/2015 9:53 pm, Munich Orientation Convention wrote:
>>  
>> Hi Cameron,
>>  
>> thank you for the kind support. According to Mahatma Gandhi, the stages for 
>> innovations are:
>>  
>> First they ignore you,
>> then they laugh at you,
>> then they fight you.
>> Then you win.
>>  
>> OGC didn’t reach the second stage.
>> From my side, I’m open for any proposals in favor of the consumer, e. g. 50% 
>> of the humankind who think to be unable to read maps 
>> www.volksnav.de/YouAreHere .
>>  
>> Henrique  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> Von: Cameron Shorter [mailto:cameron.shor...@gmail.com 
>> ] 
>> Gesendet: Sonntag, 18. Oktober 2015 11:29
>> An: Munich Orientation Convention; standa...@lists.osgeo.org 
>> 
>> Cc: is...@volksnav.bi ; lib...@volksnav.bi 
>> ; donat...@volksnav.bi; Scott Simmons
>> Betreff: Re: [OSGeo-Standards] sponsoring / relevance / standard
>>  
>> Hi Henrique,
>> I suspect that you would be better served to develop a standard under the 
>> umbrella of the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC).
>> The OGC is specifically set up to develop spatial standards, where as OSGeo 
>> has a focus on Open Source geospatial software (which typically makes use of 
>> OGC standards).
>> 
>> Have you reached out to the OGC community yet? If not, I suggest getting in 
>> touch with them. I've CCed Scott Simmons from the OGC, who is also on this 
>> list.
>> 
>> Warm regards,
>> Cameron
>> 
>> On 18/10/2015 7:30 pm, Munich Orientation Convention wrote:
>>  
>> Hello Jeff,
>>  
>> I'm deeply grateful that I've been invited to propose to this discussion 
>> forum the possibility to let the Munich Orientation Convention be an OSGeo 
>> standard. 
>>  
>> So Burundian authorities could discover and prove the benefits of the 
>> system. They have already effectuated the creation of the VolksNav S.a  
>> www.volksnav.bi  which will now be the local 
>> provider of better orientation tools. VolksNav S.a will also produce maps 
>> with clock based search grids and plans to reproduce all introduced systems 
>> in other African countries. Investors are already knocking on the door.
>>  
>> The dominoes will fall from there, the Convention will be a de-facto 
>> standard and OSGeo will have no relevance within this process.
>>  
>> I'd like to return the favor in 2016 as a sponsor. Would this be possible or 
>> are there restrictions on that?
>>  
>> Henrique
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Standards mailing list
>> standa...@lists.osgeo.org 
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/standards 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Cameron Shorter,
>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
>> LISAsoft
>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>>  
>> P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com ,  F +61 2 
>> 9009 5099
> 
> -- 
> Cameron Shorter,
> Software and Data Solutions Manager
> LISAsoft
> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
> 
> P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com ,  F +61 2 
> 9009 5099

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?

[Jody Garnett]

That repo-criteria articles is a great read - thanks!

One key advantage OSGeo has as a foundation is we are not "picky" about
where projects work from. This allows our projects to be more responsive
then similar foundations such as Apache and Eclipse. It should be noted
that these organizations require the use of their own for facilities for
reasons other than hosting (Apache wants to have a "kill switch" on
downloads and source code if any legal challenge is issued to mitigate any
damages payed out, Eclipse Foundation quite sensibly wants to have a copy
of the code incase the external forge goes down so the team does not lose
their work).

As for OSGeo we are pretty relaxed - I think the only thing we would be
actively worried about is a project hosted by a corporate CSV or similar
(since we like our projects to be vendor neutral). Before OSGeo was founded
we suffered when Refractions SVN was corrupted.

Personally I would like to ensure "we" have a copy of the code incase a
projects infrastructure goes down (example CodeHaus, Source Forge). Right
now we depend on individual committers to have a copy.

I want to be cautious of asking the board to make decisions affecting the
system admin committee.  I would prefer projects such as PostGIS negotiate
with the SAC directly (as they are in a much better position to determine
requirements/solution). The Board can be told of the plan of course, but we
need to trust our subcommittees and respect our volunteers (Indeed Regina
Obe's email backs up my feelings on this matter).

There is a balance between OSGeo branding (we could purchase GitHub
Enterprise and hook into our LDAP for example) and developer outreach
(allowing developers to work with the github account they already have
setup). I think we should keep an eye on it as GitHub popularity will
change over time just like Source Forge before it. At the time of writing I
would recommend all projects at least have a mirror on GitHub as an
outreach activity.

Aside: Please make sure your GitHub repository has a CONTRIBUTING.md
 file or similar if
you are accepting pull requests from the big bad internet.
--
Jody


--
Jody Garnett

On 18 October 2015 at 00:07, Andreas Hocevar 
wrote:

> Very well said Andrea, and I can back this up with very similar
> experiences from when the OpenLayers project moved to Github.
>
> That said, if OSGeo considers setting up a Git infrastructure, please keep
> an alternative in mind: pay for an OSGeo Github account for projects that
> want to use Git. Will burn some money, but won't burn out volunteers who
> have to keep OSGeo's own infrastructure up and running. See
> https://github.com/locationtech as an example.
>
> Andreas.
>
> On 18 Oct 2015, at 08:41, Andrea Aime 
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> just wanted to chime in saying that if OSGeo starts setting said
> guidelines,
> it should also have some benefits comparison so that projects can
> see what they might not get by avoiding Github.
>
> In particular, looking at GeoServer experience from the switch, it's rather
> evident we got more people contributing right the moment we did the
> switch, here is the contributors per month diagram, the red line
> is the date we switched from svn to GitHub:
>
> 
>
>
> Most of this is due to two factors:
> - availability of pull requests (which I believe you can get with other
> tools too)
> - critical mass on the platform (which arguably you will not get an a
> OsGeo hosting)
>
> There is however a downside of that, most of these contributions are "one
> time gigs",
> people help addressing the particular pitfall concerning them and then
> they move on:
> github did not change the number of core developers, it just increased a
> lot the
> number of other contributors.
>
> There is another benefit of moving to Github, which is build checks on
> pull requests,
> we now have Travis (Linux, OSX) building all pull requests and running the
> test suite against
> them, so we instantly know if the change breaks tests or not, and we
> planning on adding
> test coverage checks (Coveralls, already used by OpenLayers for example)
> and Windows builds
> (already used by MapServer for example).
>
> This kind of automation is also rather beneficial to filter our bad
> contributions... which is
> the dark side of lower contribution barrier, core devs have to spend quite
> some time evaluating
> pull requests... but ending up with a long queue of them gives a bad
> impression about the project
> openness. So yeah, another bit to consider I guess, is the project ready
> to take on them?
>
> So I'm not saying "everybody move to github" but I believe the above
> should be
> part of the many considerations made when evaluating a move to a different
> version control.
>
> Cheers
> Andrea
>
> --
> ==
> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
> http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
> ==

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] parcel data in US

[Raj R Singh]

One for-fee source is http://courthouseusa.com/ 
“Nearly 100 million property records with parcel boundaries in one standard 
format.”

---
Raj Singh
r...@rajsingh.org
(617) 642-9372
http://www.rajsingh.org/

> On Oct 17, 2015, at 5:19 AM, Anca Brisan  wrote:
> 
> Jachym, 
> Because you didn't specify a particular part of the US, I'll say a few cases 
> that I've dealt with. I would suggest you to start at state level and then go 
> lower by county, town/city...
> 
> Florida - open data - easy download for the whole state  
> ftp://sdrftp03.dor.state.fl.us/Map%20Data/00_2015/ 
>   
> California, mostly open, easy to search by county - LA, San Francisco, San 
> Diego, etc ... easy download 
> NY state you should find some parcel data by county here: 
> https://gis.ny.gov/gisdata/   - most of the 
> parcels are old
> NYC  - recent data, direct download from nyc.gov  
> Texas - again search by county, not to many results.
> MA, CT, PA, NJ and Indina states give opportunity for direct download for 
> many counties, towns, municipalities in their state, the parcel data might be 
> a few years old. 
> 
> Anca
> 
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 8:57 PM, Newcomb, Doug  > wrote:
> Jachym,
> The State of North Carolina has parcel data statewide at NCOnemap, 
> http://data.nconemap.gov/geoportal/catalog/main/home.page 
>  .  Search for 
> parcels.
> 
> Doug
> 
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 4:09 AM, Jachym Cepicky  > wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> (sorry for cross posted and slightly off-topic mail)
> 
> for business purpose, I was asked to find out, where we could get some parcel 
> data in USA - not necessary for free (assumed, we would like to start our 
> business with the data, reasonable prise is expected). 
> 
> Could anybody point me to agency/private business company, who is providing 
> such kind of data? Where would you say is the best starting point?
> 
> Thanks for hints
> 
> Jachym
> 
> 
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org 
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Doug Newcomb
> USFWS
> Raleigh, NC
> 919-856-4520 ext. 14  doug_newc...@fws.gov 
> 
> -
> The opinions I express are my own and are not representative of the official 
> policy of the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service or Dept. of the Interior.   Life 
> is too short for undocumented, proprietary data formats. As a federal 
> employee, my email may be subject to FOIA request.
> 
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org 
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss 
> 
> 
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] parcel data in US

[Stephen Woodbridge]

And another I had bookmarked a while ago:

http://www.boundarysolutions.com/BSI/page1.php

-Steve

On 10/18/2015 7:57 PM, Raj R Singh wrote:

One for-fee source is http://courthouseusa.com/
“Nearly 100 million property records with parcel boundaries in one
standard format.”

---
Raj Singh
r...@rajsingh.org 
(617) 642-9372
http://www.rajsingh.org/


On Oct 17, 2015, at 5:19 AM, Anca Brisan > wrote:

Jachym,
Because you didn't specify a particular part of the US, I'll say a few
cases that I've dealt with. I would suggest you to start at state
level and then go lower by county, town/city...

Florida - open data - easy download for the whole state
ftp://sdrftp03.dor.state.fl.us/Map%20Data/00_2015/
California, mostly open, easy to search by county - LA, San
Francisco, San Diego, etc ... easy download
NY state you should find some parcel data by county here:
https://gis.ny.gov/gisdata/  - most of the parcels are old
NYC  - recent data, direct download from nyc.gov 
Texas - again search by county, not to many results.
MA, CT, PA, NJ and Indina states give opportunity for direct download
for many counties, towns, municipalities in their state, the parcel
data might be a few years old.

Anca

On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 8:57 PM, Newcomb, Doug > wrote:

Jachym,
The State of North Carolina has parcel data statewide at NCOnemap,
http://data.nconemap.gov/geoportal/catalog/main/home.page .
Search for parcels.

Doug

On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 4:09 AM, Jachym Cepicky
> wrote:

Hi,

(sorry for cross posted and slightly off-topic mail)

for business purpose, I was asked to find out, where we could
get some parcel data in USA - not necessary for free (assumed,
we would like to start our business with the data, reasonable
prise is expected).

Could anybody point me to agency/private business company, who
is providing such kind of data? Where would you say is the
best starting point?

Thanks for hints

Jachym


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org 
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss




--
Doug Newcomb
USFWS
Raleigh, NC
919-856-4520 ext. 14 
doug_newc...@fws.gov 

-
The opinions I express are my own and are not representative of
the official policy of the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service or Dept.
of the Interior.   Life is too short for undocumented, proprietary
data formats. As a federal employee, my email may be subject to
FOIA request.

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org 
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org 
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss




___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss



___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?

[Andrea Aime]

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Sandro Santilli  wrote:

> How does that diagram counts contributors ?
>
> With SVN it's very unlikely that a bot can recognize contributors
> other than the committers, while with GIT it's easier to make the
> actual contributor visible to a machine (being there an "author"
> field in addition to the "committer" field).
>

Indeed, it counts the committers, and it's true that it can be skewed,
but I assure you the overall effect is negligible.

Before pull requests we used to add a "patch by xyz" in the commit
message to give credit to the actual author. I looked at the year right
before the github switch, there are 4 commits like that in total (I searched
for just "by" to make sure not to skip stuff written with slight
differences).

If I look at the last year and ask for a contributor count I get:

> git shortlog -nsu --since "one year ago" | wc -l
84

Github tells me there are 34 developers with direct commit access, but I
checked
who made a commit in the last year. we are down to only 24 people.
Sometimes devs commit from another computer and
they don't have their mail setup, which makes for a two lines in that
statistic,
one with the username, one with the mail
e.g. in that list we have for example Mauro listed twice (and so is mine):
27  Mauro Bartolomeoli
24  mbarto

So that reduces the number of actual unique contributorsq a bit, let's say
down to 75-80...
it's still 50 random people contributing to GeoServer without commit access
in the last year, or, in other words, 10 times more external contributions
compared to before the switch to Github.

The thing is, we still have patches in the bug tracker that are a few years
old, and they will likely never be merged: when they came in they probably
were either dirty, or core devs were too busy, and after a few months
applying them becomes rather challenging, so there they stay: the merge
barrier
was too high, too domanding on the core devs.

With the current pull request mechanism we have a much improved ability
to handle contributions, in part because people are reminded of the
contribution rules the moment they make the pull request, in part because
the build servers inform the submitter about a problem in the pull request
rather quickly,
but also because we can comment in a more social way about the pull
request (before reviewing the patch was a one man job), and also because
they
are always nicely grouped and in front of our eyes at every PSC meeting
(we check the pull request queue like that every two weeks, to see
if there is anything that merits special attention).


>
> I'm not trying to negate the possible benefits in terms of number
> of contributors, but I'd be careful about the correctess of available
> data.
>
> > There is another benefit of moving to Github, which is build checks on
> pull
> > requests,
>
> Yes, this is something we unfortunately lost on OSGeo.
> We used to have buildbot running to that extent, but lack of volunteers
> made that experience come to an end.
>

Mind, here I'm talking about a special integration, not the normal
continuous build for commits that are integrated, but a custom build for the
pull request, which tells you whether or not merging that pull request
will break the build (to clarify, by build I mean both compiling and running
all automated tests save for OGC CITE compliance ones).

The pull request build status, along with an indication if the patch is
mergeable, and possibly an indication
of whether the test coverage went up or down, is a huge time saver.
If a review of the patch is satisfying, the build give us the green, we can
literally
just press the merge button, thank the contributor, and move on with our
work/live,
instead of spending time trying to apply while the code moved, build, go
back and forth
with the committer in a rather inefficient way (and manually run
build/tests every damn time), and so on.

Cheers
Andrea


-- 
==
GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
==

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
55054  Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39  339 8844549

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

*AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003*

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [OSGeo-Standards] sponsoring / relevance / standard

[Cameron Shorter]

Hi Henrique,
It sounds like you are looking to build a ground swell of usage of a 
spatial encoding system. This is a difficult task, and not something 
that OSGeo or OGC processes are set up for.


First there needs to be a number of users all calling out for this 
standard, then OGC will help these users work together to formalise the 
standard, then software will start getting written to support the 
standard, then OSGeo will help with branding this software as quality 
software. (I'm grossly simplifying).


The very hard part, which I think is your challenge, is to build a 
ground swell of people calling out for this standard. I wish you luck, 
but I think it will be a hard.


Cameron

On 18/10/2015 9:53 pm, Munich Orientation Convention wrote:


Hi Cameron,

thank you for the kind support. According to Mahatma Gandhi, the 
stages for innovations are:


First they ignore you,

then they laugh at you,

then they fight you.

Then you win.

OGC didn’t reach the second stage.

From my side, I’m open for any proposals in favor of the consumer, e. 
g. 50% of the humankind who think to be unable to read maps 
www.volksnav.de/YouAreHere .


Henrique

*Von:*Cameron Shorter [mailto:cameron.shor...@gmail.com]
*Gesendet:* Sonntag, 18. Oktober 2015 11:29
*An:* Munich Orientation Convention; standa...@lists.osgeo.org
*Cc:* is...@volksnav.bi; lib...@volksnav.bi; donat...@volksnav.bi; 
Scott Simmons

*Betreff:* Re: [OSGeo-Standards] sponsoring / relevance / standard

Hi Henrique,
I suspect that you would be better served to develop a standard under 
the umbrella of the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC).
The OGC is specifically set up to develop spatial standards, where as 
OSGeo has a focus on Open Source geospatial software (which typically 
makes use of OGC standards).


Have you reached out to the OGC community yet? If not, I suggest 
getting in touch with them. I've CCed Scott Simmons from the OGC, who 
is also on this list.


Warm regards,
Cameron

On 18/10/2015 7:30 pm, Munich Orientation Convention wrote:

Hello Jeff,

I'm deeply grateful that I've been invited to propose to this
discussion forum the possibility to let the Munich Orientation
Convention be an OSGeo standard.

So Burundian authorities could discover and prove the benefits of
the system. They have already effectuated the creation of the
VolksNav S.a www.volksnav.bi  which will
now be the local provider of better orientation tools. VolksNav
S.a will also produce maps with clock based search grids and plans
to reproduce all introduced systems in other African countries.
Investors are already knocking on the door.

The dominoes will fall from there, the Convention will be a
de-facto standard and OSGeo will have no relevance within this
process.

I'd like to return the favor in 2016 as a sponsor. Would this be
possible or are there restrictions on that?

Henrique




___

Standards mailing list

standa...@lists.osgeo.org 

http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/standards



--
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
LISAsoft
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
P +61 2 9009 5000,  Wwww.lisasoft.com ,  F +61 2 9009 
5099


--
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
LISAsoft
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[OSGeo-Discuss] sponsoring / relevance / standard

[Munich Orientation Convention]

 

Hello Jeff,

 

I'm deeply grateful that I've been invited to propose to this discussion
forum the possibility to let the Munich Orientation Convention be an OSGeo
standard. 

 

So Burundian authorities could discover and prove the benefits of the
system. They have already effectuated the creation of the VolksNav S.a
www.volksnav.bi which will now be the local provider of better orientation
tools. VolksNav S.a will also produce maps with clock based search grids and
plans to reproduce all introduced systems in other African countries.
Investors are already knocking on the door.

 

The dominoes will fall from there, the Convention will be a de-facto
standard and OSGeo will have no relevance within this process.

 

I'd like to return the favor in 2016 as a sponsor. Would this be possible or
are there restrictions on that?

 

Henrique

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?

[Sandro Santilli]

On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 10:22:10PM +0200, Mateusz Loskot wrote:

> Once Sandro has completed setting up git.osgeo.org infrastructure, who
> is going to maintain it?

Just a note: I'm not going to setup git.osgeo.org infrastructure
against the will of OSGeo board.
So far all I'm doing is feasibility research.

--strk;
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?

[Sandro Santilli]

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 08:41:12AM +0200, Andrea Aime wrote:

> In particular, looking at GeoServer experience from the switch, it's rather
> evident we got more people contributing right the moment we did the
> switch, here is the contributors per month diagram, the red line
> is the date we switched from svn to GitHub:

How does that diagram counts contributors ?

With SVN it's very unlikely that a bot can recognize contributors
other than the committers, while with GIT it's easier to make the
actual contributor visible to a machine (being there an "author"
field in addition to the "committer" field).

I'm not trying to negate the possible benefits in terms of number
of contributors, but I'd be careful about the correctess of available
data.

> There is another benefit of moving to Github, which is build checks on pull
> requests,

Yes, this is something we unfortunately lost on OSGeo.
We used to have buildbot running to that extent, but lack of volunteers
made that experience come to an end.

--strk;
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?

[Andrea Aime]

Hi,
just wanted to chime in saying that if OSGeo starts setting said guidelines,
it should also have some benefits comparison so that projects can
see what they might not get by avoiding Github.

In particular, looking at GeoServer experience from the switch, it's rather
evident we got more people contributing right the moment we did the
switch, here is the contributors per month diagram, the red line
is the date we switched from svn to GitHub:

[image: Inline image 1]


Most of this is due to two factors:
- availability of pull requests (which I believe you can get with other
tools too)
- critical mass on the platform (which arguably you will not get an a OsGeo
hosting)

There is however a downside of that, most of these contributions are "one
time gigs",
people help addressing the particular pitfall concerning them and then they
move on:
github did not change the number of core developers, it just increased a
lot the
number of other contributors.

There is another benefit of moving to Github, which is build checks on pull
requests,
we now have Travis (Linux, OSX) building all pull requests and running the
test suite against
them, so we instantly know if the change breaks tests or not, and we
planning on adding
test coverage checks (Coveralls, already used by OpenLayers for example)
and Windows builds
(already used by MapServer for example).

This kind of automation is also rather beneficial to filter our bad
contributions... which is
the dark side of lower contribution barrier, core devs have to spend quite
some time evaluating
pull requests... but ending up with a long queue of them gives a bad
impression about the project
openness. So yeah, another bit to consider I guess, is the project ready to
take on them?

So I'm not saying "everybody move to github" but I believe the above
should be
part of the many considerations made when evaluating a move to a different
version control.

Cheers
Andrea

-- 
==
GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.
==

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
55054  Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313
fax: +39 0584 1660272
mob: +39  339 8844549

http://www.geo-solutions.it
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it

*AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003*

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il
loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio,
per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo
messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio
stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso,
divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od
utilizzarlo per finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai
principi dettati dal D.Lgs. 196/2003.



The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for
the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or
proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act
(Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection
Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is
strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named
addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the
information in this message that has been received in error. The sender
does not give any warranty or accept liability as the content, accuracy or
completeness of sent messages and accepts no responsibility  for changes
made after they were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of
e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.

---
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?

[Paragon Corporation]

A lot of what instigated this conversation is what PostGIS should do? stick 
with SVN/Trac, get rid of SVN and just move everything to GitHub, or have an 
OSGeo GIT and a GitHub mirror and still keep trac.

I don't think it makes sense for us to completely ditch github, but then I also 
think there is a downside to having github as our official repo.

 

Right now PostGIS is mirroring our svn repo to GitHub and we get enough pull 
requests from users, sometimes even big patches.  So I think having a mirror on 
GitHub takes care of that. It's a bit extra effort to accept the pulls, but 
that may be a good thing as it forces us to scrutinize more.  So we get the 
benefit of travis testing etc already.

 

However I also care about package maintainers since to me they are the life and 
blood of PostGIS.  They insure that new users have an easy time installing 
postgresql / postgis.

Many of them would prefer OSGEO hosting (and preferably git over svn)  because 
why force someone to get a github account just to put in a bug report or submit 
a patch.  If they should be forced to create an account with a  faceless 
organization, it should be OSGeo :), not github.

 

Relevant notes from Package maintainers:

https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-devel/2015-October/025361.html

 

https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-devel/2015-October/025359.html

 

 

We also have a lot of users who just report bugs.  I'm not so sure they have 
github accounts or care to. Bug reports are more important to me than new 
contributions as every new contribution requires some level of stress testing.

 

Thanks,

Regina Obe

PostGIS PSC member

Windows PostGIS Stackbuilder Maintainer

 

 

From: Discuss [mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Andreas 
Hocevar
Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2015 3:08 AM
To: OSGeo Discussions 
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?

 

Very well said Andrea, and I can back this up with very similar experiences 
from when the OpenLayers project moved to Github.

 

That said, if OSGeo considers setting up a Git infrastructure, please keep an 
alternative in mind: pay for an OSGeo Github account for projects that want to 
use Git. Will burn some money, but won't burn out volunteers who have to keep 
OSGeo's own infrastructure up and running. See https://github.com/locationtech 
as an example.

 

Andreas.

 

On 18 Oct 2015, at 08:41, Andrea Aime  > wrote:

 

Hi,

just wanted to chime in saying that if OSGeo starts setting said guidelines,

it should also have some benefits comparison so that projects can

see what they might not get by avoiding Github.

 

In particular, looking at GeoServer experience from the switch, it's rather

evident we got more people contributing right the moment we did the

switch, here is the contributors per month diagram, the red line

is the date we switched from svn to GitHub:

 



 

 

Most of this is due to two factors:

- availability of pull requests (which I believe you can get with other tools 
too)

- critical mass on the platform (which arguably you will not get an a OsGeo 
hosting)

 

There is however a downside of that, most of these contributions are "one time 
gigs",

people help addressing the particular pitfall concerning them and then they 
move on:

github did not change the number of core developers, it just increased a lot the

number of other contributors.

 

There is another benefit of moving to Github, which is build checks on pull 
requests,

we now have Travis (Linux, OSX) building all pull requests and running the test 
suite against

them, so we instantly know if the change breaks tests or not, and we planning 
on adding

test coverage checks (Coveralls, already used by OpenLayers for example) and 
Windows builds 

(already used by MapServer for example).

 

This kind of automation is also rather beneficial to filter our bad 
contributions... which is

the dark side of lower contribution barrier, core devs have to spend quite some 
time evaluating

pull requests... but ending up with a long queue of them gives a bad impression 
about the project

openness. So yeah, another bit to consider I guess, is the project ready to 
take on them?

 

So I'm not saying "everybody move to github" but I believe the above should 
be

part of the many considerations made when evaluating a move to a different 
version control.

 

Cheers

Andrea

 

-- 

==

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit

http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.

==

 

Ing. Andrea Aime 

@geowolf

Technical Lead

 

GeoSolutions S.A.S.

Via Poggio alle Viti 1187

55054  Massarosa (LU)

Italy

phone: +39 0584 962313  

fax: +39 0584 1660272  

mob: +39    339 8844549

 

http://www.geo-solutions.it  

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?

[Andreas Hocevar]

Very well said Andrea, and I can back this up with very similar experiences 
from when the OpenLayers project moved to Github.

That said, if OSGeo considers setting up a Git infrastructure, please keep an 
alternative in mind: pay for an OSGeo Github account for projects that want to 
use Git. Will burn some money, but won't burn out volunteers who have to keep 
OSGeo's own infrastructure up and running. See https://github.com/locationtech 
as an example.

Andreas.

> On 18 Oct 2015, at 08:41, Andrea Aime  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> just wanted to chime in saying that if OSGeo starts setting said guidelines,
> it should also have some benefits comparison so that projects can
> see what they might not get by avoiding Github.
> 
> In particular, looking at GeoServer experience from the switch, it's rather
> evident we got more people contributing right the moment we did the
> switch, here is the contributors per month diagram, the red line
> is the date we switched from svn to GitHub:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Most of this is due to two factors:
> - availability of pull requests (which I believe you can get with other tools 
> too)
> - critical mass on the platform (which arguably you will not get an a OsGeo 
> hosting)
> 
> There is however a downside of that, most of these contributions are "one 
> time gigs",
> people help addressing the particular pitfall concerning them and then they 
> move on:
> github did not change the number of core developers, it just increased a lot 
> the
> number of other contributors.
> 
> There is another benefit of moving to Github, which is build checks on pull 
> requests,
> we now have Travis (Linux, OSX) building all pull requests and running the 
> test suite against
> them, so we instantly know if the change breaks tests or not, and we planning 
> on adding
> test coverage checks (Coveralls, already used by OpenLayers for example) and 
> Windows builds 
> (already used by MapServer for example).
> 
> This kind of automation is also rather beneficial to filter our bad 
> contributions... which is
> the dark side of lower contribution barrier, core devs have to spend quite 
> some time evaluating
> pull requests... but ending up with a long queue of them gives a bad 
> impression about the project
> openness. So yeah, another bit to consider I guess, is the project ready to 
> take on them?
> 
> So I'm not saying "everybody move to github" but I believe the above 
> should be
> part of the many considerations made when evaluating a move to a different 
> version control.
> 
> Cheers
> Andrea
> 
> -- 
> ==
> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
> http://goo.gl/it488V  for more information.
> ==
> 
> Ing. Andrea Aime 
> @geowolf
> Technical Lead
> 
> GeoSolutions S.A.S.
> Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
> 55054  Massarosa (LU)
> Italy
> phone: +39 0584 962313 
> fax: +39 0584 1660272 
> mob: +39  339 8844549 
> 
> http://www.geo-solutions.it 
> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it 
> 
> AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
> 
> Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o nel/i 
> file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il loro 
> utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio, per le 
> finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo messaggio 
> senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di darcene notizia 
> via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del messaggio stesso, 
> cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo 
> anche in parte, distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per 
> finalità diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati dal 
> D.Lgs. 196/2003.
> 
>  
> The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely for 
> the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be confidential or 
> proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of privacy act 
> (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection 
> Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction, 
> copying, distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial, is 
> strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the named addressee(s). 
> If you are not the intended recipient, please contact immediately the sender 
> by telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the information in this message that 
> has been received in error. The sender does not give any warranty or accept 
> liability as the content, accuracy or completeness of sent messages and 
> accepts no responsibility  for changes made after they were sent or for other 
> risks which arise as a result of e-mail transmission, viruses, etc.
> 
> 
> 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo thoughts on discussion/collaboration platform hosting

[Sandro Santilli]

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 03:28:30PM +0200, Mateusz Loskot wrote:

> communication channels like Gitter. I see, people may prefer chats like that.
> By the way https://gitter.im/OSGeo.

People that don't mind having a GitHub account and using proprietary
software to communicate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gitter

--strk;
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo thoughts on discussion/collaboration platform hosting

[Jeff McKenna]

Hi Mike,

I agree this is a good discussion.  By the way, Tim Sutton just pointed 
me to a decision making platform that QGIS is now using, I think it 
would be great to have an OSGeo instance (see below):




On 2015-10-17 6:53 PM, Tim Sutton wrote:
>
> did you consider using something like loomio - we found it very
> frustrating dealing with decisions via email +1 / -1 etc system as it is
> very hard to know when the decision is made, hard to back reference
> decisions and people tend to start voting on things willy nilly without
> having a well defined motion in place. We recently switched to using
> loomio.org  which is a FOSS platform for shared
> decision making. It separates the discussion from the vote(s) but puts
> them side by side so you can see the context. It also lets you set a
> deadline for making votes. Its really nice and natural to use. Maybe it
> would be nice to have an OSGEO instance that all projects could use - we
> just opted to use their hosted version under the philosophy that the
> less stuff we have to manage ourselves the better…. Here is our QGIS
> project on loomio:
>
> https://www.loomio.org/g/EKV14L8A/qgis




On 2015-10-18 9:16 AM, Michael Smith wrote:

Along the lines of code hosting, do we want to think about some kind of
OSGeo hosted Slack-like service for the community / projects, eg
MatterMost, RocketChat, etc?


I wanted to start this as a separate topic although a lot of these
alternatives are based on git or gitlab so its a very related discussion.

What would be useful to OSGeo projects?


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: OSGeo thoughts on discussion/collaboration platform hosting

[Michael Smith]

Jeff,

Yes, I could see something like loomio being very helpful. I don't know if
we would want both loomio and something slack-like but we might. It would
be fantastic for board meetings.

I would definitely be in support of something like this or slack or
something being hosted by OSGeo.

Mike



Michael Smith
OSGeo Foundation Treasurer
treasu...@osgeo.org








-Original Message-
From: Discuss  on behalf of Jeff McKenna

Date: Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 9:34 AM
To: OSGeo Discussions 
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo thoughts on
discussion/collaboration platform hosting
Resent-From: Michael Smith 

>Hi Mike,
>
>I agree this is a good discussion.  By the way, Tim Sutton just pointed
>me to a decision making platform that QGIS is now using, I think it
>would be great to have an OSGeo instance (see below):
>
>
>
>On 2015-10-17 6:53 PM, Tim Sutton wrote:
> >
> > did you consider using something like loomio - we found it very
> > frustrating dealing with decisions via email +1 / -1 etc system as it
>is
> > very hard to know when the decision is made, hard to back reference
> > decisions and people tend to start voting on things willy nilly without
> > having a well defined motion in place. We recently switched to using
> > loomio.org  which is a FOSS
>platform for shared
> > decision making. It separates the discussion from the vote(s) but puts
> > them side by side so you can see the context. It also lets you set a
> > deadline for making votes. Its really nice and natural to use. Maybe it
> > would be nice to have an OSGEO instance that all projects could use -
>we
> > just opted to use their hosted version under the philosophy that the
> > less stuff we have to manage ourselves the betterŠ. Here is our QGIS
> > project on loomio:
> >
> > BlockedBlockedhttps://www.loomio.org/g/EKV14L8A/qgisBlocked
>
>
>
>
>On 2015-10-18 9:16 AM, Michael Smith wrote:
>> Along the lines of code hosting, do we want to think about some kind of
>> OSGeo hosted Slack-like service for the community / projects, eg
>> MatterMost, RocketChat, etc?
>>
>>
>> I wanted to start this as a separate topic although a lot of these
>> alternatives are based on git or gitlab so its a very related
>>discussion.
>>
>> What would be useful to OSGeo projects?
>>
>___
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>BlockedBlockedhttp://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discussBlocked


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?

[Sandro Santilli]

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 09:07:52AM +0200, Andreas Hocevar wrote:

> please keep an alternative in mind: pay for an OSGeo Github account for
> projects that want to use Git. Will burn some money, but won't burn out
> volunteers who have to keep OSGeo's own infrastructure up and running. See
> https://github.com/locationtech as an example.

Please keep another alternative in mind: pay OSGeo system administrators.

Will burn some money, but won't burn out volunteers who have to keep
OSGeo's own infrastructure up and running.

Even if I understand that the cost for OSGeo sysadmins might be higher
than the cost for a GitHub account, I can also see that the money
spent on SAC might result in indirect benefit for free software tools
(I'm sure SAC people do file tickets for the tools they use) while
those spent on GitHub could only result in benefit for the proprietary
software used to run that service.

--strk;
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?

[Michael Smith]

I very much like the idea of paying SAC administrators for all the great
work they do. And setting up an OSGeo git infrastructure (git+trac,
gitlab, or ???) is right in line with our mission statement of our
foundation. 

I'm enjoying where this discussion is going. I don't think we have settled
on a consensus yet but the conversion is very enlightening.

Mike


Michael Smith
OSGeo Foundation Treasurer
treasu...@osgeo.org





-Original Message-
From: Discuss  on behalf of Sandro
Santilli 
Date: Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 6:18 AM
To: Andreas Hocevar 
Cc: OSGeo Discussions 
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?
Resent-From: Michael Smith 

>On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 09:07:52AM +0200, Andreas Hocevar wrote:
>
>> please keep an alternative in mind: pay for an OSGeo Github account for
>> projects that want to use Git. Will burn some money, but won't burn out
>> volunteers who have to keep OSGeo's own infrastructure up and running.
>>See
>> BlockedBlockedhttps://github.com/locationtechBlocked as an example.
>
>Please keep another alternative in mind: pay OSGeo system administrators.
>
>Will burn some money, but won't burn out volunteers who have to keep
>OSGeo's own infrastructure up and running.
>
>Even if I understand that the cost for OSGeo sysadmins might be higher
>than the cost for a GitHub account, I can also see that the money
>spent on SAC might result in indirect benefit for free software tools
>(I'm sure SAC people do file tickets for the tools they use) while
>those spent on GitHub could only result in benefit for the proprietary
>software used to run that service.
>
>--strk;
>___
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>BlockedBlockedhttp://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discussBlocked


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo thoughts on discussion/collaboration platform hosting

[Michael Smith]

Along the lines of code hosting, do we want to think about some kind of
OSGeo hosted Slack-like service for the community / projects, eg
MatterMost, RocketChat, etc?


I wanted to start this as a separate topic although a lot of these
alternatives are based on git or gitlab so its a very related discussion.

What would be useful to OSGeo projects?


Michael Smith
OSGeo Foundation Treasurer
treasu...@osgeo.org





___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo thoughts on discussion/collaboration platform hosting

[Sandro Santilli]

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 08:16:10AM -0400, Michael Smith wrote:
> Along the lines of code hosting, do we want to think about some kind of
> OSGeo hosted Slack-like service for the community / projects, eg
> MatterMost, RocketChat, etc?
> 
> 
> I wanted to start this as a separate topic although a lot of these
> alternatives are based on git or gitlab so its a very related discussion.
> 
> What would be useful to OSGeo projects?

It takes a poll, I guess.
Personally, IRC serves me well (but we could add an irc server link to
the freenode network from osgeo machines :)

BTW: this wiki page may be helpful, and surely can be enhanced:
http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Collection:SaaSS_replacements

--strk;
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: OSGeo thoughts on discussion/collaboration platform hosting

[Michael Smith]

One problem that I have with IRC is being firewalled due to the ports (at
work or vpn).

I also find the mobile clients for the Slack-like alternatives to be much
better than any IRC mobile client I've found. And just a generally higher
level of functionality while still allowing IRC clients (via some IRC
gateway).

Mike



Michael Smith

US Army Corps
Remote Sensing GIS/Center
michael.sm...@usace.army.mil








-Original Message-
From: Discuss  on behalf of Sandro
Santilli 
Date: Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 8:35 AM
To: Michael Smith 
Cc: OSGeo Discussions 
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo thoughts on
discussion/collaboration platform hosting
Resent-From: Michael Smith 

>On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 08:16:10AM -0400, Michael Smith wrote:
>> Along the lines of code hosting, do we want to think about some kind of
>> OSGeo hosted Slack-like service for the community / projects, eg
>> MatterMost, RocketChat, etc?
>> 
>> 
>> I wanted to start this as a separate topic although a lot of these
>> alternatives are based on git or gitlab so its a very related
>>discussion.
>> 
>> What would be useful to OSGeo projects?
>
>It takes a poll, I guess.
>Personally, IRC serves me well (but we could add an irc server link to
>the freenode network from osgeo machines :)
>
>BTW: this wiki page may be helpful, and surely can be enhanced:
>Blockedhttp://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Collection:SaaSS_replacementsBlocked
>
>--strk;
>___
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>Blockedhttp://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discussBlocked


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: OSGeo thoughts on discussion/collaboration platform hosting

[Sandro Santilli]

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 01:17:18PM +, Smith, Michael ERDC-RDE-CRREL-NH 
wrote:
> One problem that I have with IRC is being firewalled due to the ports.

That'd be easily solvable by having our own server running on port
80 of irc.osgeo.org.

> I also find the mobile clients for the Slack-like alternatives to be much
> better than any IRC mobile client I've found. And just a generally higher
> level of functionality while still allowing IRC clients (via some IRC
> gateway).

I find mobile devices to have such an horrible keyboard that I'd hate
to use them for chatting, anyway. In any case, listing what
functionality you're after would be a good start. Maybe draft a wiki
page about that ?

--strk;
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?

[Angelos Tzotsos]

Hi Andreas,

There is already an OSGeo account on GitHub, managed by SAC members:
https://github.com/OSGeo

This discussion started 6 months ago on IRC, during the OSGeoLive 
transition to Git.
Since there was no git.osgeo.org setup at the time, we decided to 
temporarily host OSGeoLive git repository there, waiting for an official 
OSGeo hosting option. We are still using OSGeo Trac as a ticketing system.


I see the benefits that Andrea mentioned, and I believe that even if the 
official OSGeoLive copy moves back to OSGeo infrastructure, we will 
probably keep a copy on GitHub for project visibility and for accepting 
pull requests... Lets keep in mind that Linux kernel project is doing 
exactly the same: they host the kernel code under kernel.org and have a 
copy on GitHub as a backup. Actually this kept the kernel work going, 
when kernel.org faced some serious downtime 4 years ago:


https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/9/4/92

It is true that GitHub is not Free Software, so IMO we should not be 
depending on it. I see the ethical issues that arise from using a non 
Free provider and it is not the only case in our ecosystem eg. Transifex 
used to be Free Software and it is not anymore:


https://github.com/transifex/transifex/issues/206
https://github.com/tymofij/transifex/pull/1#issuecomment-14206884

Best,
Angelos


On 10/18/2015 10:07 AM, Andreas Hocevar wrote:

Very well said Andrea, and I can back this up with very similar experiences 
from when the OpenLayers project moved to Github.

That said, if OSGeo considers setting up a Git infrastructure, please keep an 
alternative in mind: pay for an OSGeo Github account for projects that want to 
use Git. Will burn some money, but won't burn out volunteers who have to keep 
OSGeo's own infrastructure up and running. See https://github.com/locationtech 
as an example.

Andreas.


On 18 Oct 2015, at 08:41, Andrea Aime  wrote:

Hi,
just wanted to chime in saying that if OSGeo starts setting said guidelines,
it should also have some benefits comparison so that projects can
see what they might not get by avoiding Github.

In particular, looking at GeoServer experience from the switch, it's rather
evident we got more people contributing right the moment we did the
switch, here is the contributors per month diagram, the red line
is the date we switched from svn to GitHub:




Most of this is due to two factors:
- availability of pull requests (which I believe you can get with other tools 
too)
- critical mass on the platform (which arguably you will not get an a OsGeo 
hosting)

There is however a downside of that, most of these contributions are "one time 
gigs",
people help addressing the particular pitfall concerning them and then they 
move on:
github did not change the number of core developers, it just increased a lot the
number of other contributors.

There is another benefit of moving to Github, which is build checks on pull 
requests,
we now have Travis (Linux, OSX) building all pull requests and running the test 
suite against
them, so we instantly know if the change breaks tests or not, and we planning 
on adding
test coverage checks (Coveralls, already used by OpenLayers for example) and 
Windows builds
(already used by MapServer for example).

This kind of automation is also rather beneficial to filter our bad 
contributions... which is
the dark side of lower contribution barrier, core devs have to spend quite some 
time evaluating
pull requests... but ending up with a long queue of them gives a bad impression 
about the project
openness. So yeah, another bit to consider I guess, is the project ready to 
take on them?

So I'm not saying "everybody move to github" but I believe the above should 
be
part of the many considerations made when evaluating a move to a different 
version control.

Cheers
Andrea

--
==
GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
http://goo.gl/it488V  for more information.
==

Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolf
Technical Lead

GeoSolutions S.A.S.
Via Poggio alle Viti 1187
55054  Massarosa (LU)
Italy
phone: +39 0584 962313 
fax: +39 0584 1660272 
mob: +39  339 8844549 

http://www.geo-solutions.it 
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it 

AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003

Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o nel/i 
file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate. Il loro utilizzo 
è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio, per le finalità 
indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne 
il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di darcene notizia via e-mail e di 
procedere alla distruzione del messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro 
sistema. Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte, 
distribuirlo ad 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?

[Sandro Santilli]

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 01:34:57PM +0300, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:

> It is true that GitHub is not Free Software, so IMO we should not be
> depending on it. I see the ethical issues that arise from using a
> non Free provider and it is not the only case in our ecosystem eg.
> Transifex used to be Free Software and it is not anymore:
> 
> https://github.com/transifex/transifex/issues/206
> https://github.com/tymofij/transifex/pull/1#issuecomment-14206884

Thanks for the pointers, Angelos.
I think this shows pretty clearly what the risk is when relying
on external services. Transifex was GPL at the time we decided
to move the code there. I hoped OSGeo would setup a translation
infrastructure back then too (~2012) but nothing came out of it:
https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/postgis-devel/2012-October/022234.html

Now the cost of that choice would be that of asking all translators
to create new accounts elsewhere, if we want to move away of
transifex.com:
https://trac.osgeo.org/postgis/ticket/3339

--strk;
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo thoughts on discussion/collaboration platform hosting

[Tom Kralidis]

fwiw DemocracyOS [1] may be worth a look as well.

[1] http://democracyos.org/

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Jeff McKenna
 wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> I agree this is a good discussion.  By the way, Tim Sutton just pointed me
> to a decision making platform that QGIS is now using, I think it would be
> great to have an OSGeo instance (see below):
>
> 
>
> On 2015-10-17 6:53 PM, Tim Sutton wrote:
>>
>> did you consider using something like loomio - we found it very
>> frustrating dealing with decisions via email +1 / -1 etc system as it is
>> very hard to know when the decision is made, hard to back reference
>> decisions and people tend to start voting on things willy nilly without
>> having a well defined motion in place. We recently switched to using
>> loomio.org  which is a FOSS platform for shared
>> decision making. It separates the discussion from the vote(s) but puts
>> them side by side so you can see the context. It also lets you set a
>> deadline for making votes. Its really nice and natural to use. Maybe it
>> would be nice to have an OSGEO instance that all projects could use - we
>> just opted to use their hosted version under the philosophy that the
>> less stuff we have to manage ourselves the better…. Here is our QGIS
>> project on loomio:
>>
>> https://www.loomio.org/g/EKV14L8A/qgis
>
>
> 
>
> On 2015-10-18 9:16 AM, Michael Smith wrote:
>>
>> Along the lines of code hosting, do we want to think about some kind of
>> OSGeo hosted Slack-like service for the community / projects, eg
>> MatterMost, RocketChat, etc?
>>
>>
>> I wanted to start this as a separate topic although a lot of these
>> alternatives are based on git or gitlab so its a very related discussion.
>>
>> What would be useful to OSGeo projects?
>>
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [OSGeo-Standards] sponsoring / relevance / standard

[Munich Orientation Convention]

 

Hi Cameron,

 

thank you for the kind support. According to Mahatma Gandhi, the stages for 
innovations are:

 

First they ignore you,

then they laugh at you,

then they fight you.

Then you win.

 

OGC didn’t reach the second stage.

>From my side, I’m open for any proposals in favor of the consumer, e. g. 50% 
>of the humankind who think to be unable to read maps 
>www.volksnav.de/YouAreHere.

 

Henrique  

 

 

 

Von: Cameron Shorter [mailto:cameron.shor...@gmail.com] 
Gesendet: Sonntag, 18. Oktober 2015 11:29
An: Munich Orientation Convention; standa...@lists.osgeo.org
Cc: is...@volksnav.bi; lib...@volksnav.bi; donat...@volksnav.bi; Scott Simmons
Betreff: Re: [OSGeo-Standards] sponsoring / relevance / standard

 

Hi Henrique,
I suspect that you would be better served to develop a standard under the 
umbrella of the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC).
The OGC is specifically set up to develop spatial standards, where as OSGeo has 
a focus on Open Source geospatial software (which typically makes use of OGC 
standards).

Have you reached out to the OGC community yet? If not, I suggest getting in 
touch with them. I've CCed Scott Simmons from the OGC, who is also on this list.

Warm regards,
Cameron

On 18/10/2015 7:30 pm, Munich Orientation Convention wrote:

 

Hello Jeff,

 

I'm deeply grateful that I've been invited to propose to this discussion forum 
the possibility to let the Munich Orientation Convention be an OSGeo standard. 

 

So Burundian authorities could discover and prove the benefits of the system. 
They have already effectuated the creation of the VolksNav S.a  www.volksnav.bi 
which will now be the local provider of better orientation tools. VolksNav S.a 
will also produce maps with clock based search grids and plans to reproduce all 
introduced systems in other African countries. Investors are already knocking 
on the door.

 

The dominoes will fall from there, the Convention will be a de-facto standard 
and OSGeo will have no relevance within this process.

 

I'd like to return the favor in 2016 as a sponsor. Would this be possible or 
are there restrictions on that?

 

Henrique






___
Standards mailing list
standa...@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/standards





-- 
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
LISAsoft
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
 
P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo thoughts on discussion/collaboration platform hosting

[Mateusz Loskot]

On 18 October 2015 at 14:16, Michael Smith  wrote:
> Along the lines of code hosting, do we want to think about some kind of
> OSGeo hosted Slack-like service for the community / projects, eg
> MatterMost, RocketChat, etc?

Personally, IRC has served me well, but recently I started appreciating
communication channels like Gitter. I see, people may prefer chats like that.
By the way https://gitter.im/OSGeo.

For a GitHub-hosted project, I see how Gitter may be valuable for discussions
about issues, PRs, with easy linking to those artefacts, with archived logs,
but without polluting issues/PRs with too many comments.
Too much brainstorming in comments to issues/PRs may easily become
maintenance nightmare.

> I wanted to start this as a separate topic although a lot of these
> alternatives are based on git or gitlab so its a very related discussion.
>
> What would be useful to OSGeo projects?

Yes, I guess so.

Best regards,
-- 
Mateusz  Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Ica-osgeo-labs] Ideas/inputs for having a cloud service that runs the OSGeo-Live VM

[Suchith Anand]

Thanks Cameron, Angelos, Giuseppe , Peter and everyone who contributed to these 
discussions. I am ccing this to discuss list so that the wider community and 
users who want a cloud service can let their  views known and  how they would 
use and benefit from an OSGeo-Live cloud service.

That way, we will get better idea if  there is need/demand and a sustaining 
community who will step up to keep the project maintained with each OSGeo-Live 
release.

All - please look though the ideas/inputs below that Cameron summarised for 
OSGeo-Live sustainable cloud service based discussions we had so far in 
education and live lists. If you are able to contribute to this , please let us 
all know. Thanks.

Suchith


From: ica-osgeo-labs [ica-osgeo-labs-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] on behalf of 
Angelos Tzotsos [gcpp.kal...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2015 12:01 PM
To: live-demo; ica-osgeo-l...@lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [Ica-osgeo-labs] Ideas/inputs for having a cloud service that runs 
the OSGeo-Live VM

I realize that my previous e-mail was not received by the list so I summarize:

1. OSGeo-Live is already cloud-ready on Synnefo stack
http://www.synnefo.org/
So basically we could deploy synnefo + geneti on OSGeo infrastructure and have 
a Free Software solution.
Alternatively we could deploy an OpenStack instance.
https://www.openstack.org/software/
We should ask SAC if the above options are feasible.

2. In case we want to deploy OSGeo-Live on AWS, it seems straightforward:
http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/VMImportPrerequisites.html
https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/vm-import/

Any other options in mind?

Best,
Angelos


On 10/18/2015 01:32 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
Bringing a few different email threads back to one, and answering Suchith's 
"next steps" question:

On 16/10/2015 12:43 am, Suchith Anand wrote:
Cameron - from your experiences with OSGeo live community, what do you think is 
the best way now forward ? Can you please summarise all discussions so far and 
reply to the public lists.Thanks.

Suchith
If we are to be successful at setting up an OSGeo-Live sustainable cloud 
service, I suggest we consider:

1. Would a cloud service be used? By who?
I'd suggest that people who want a cloud service speak up, say how you would 
use an OSGeo-Live cloud service. We are looking here to determine if there is a 
sustaining community who will step up to keep the project maintained with each 
OSGeo-Live release.

2. What are the steps technically required to set up the cloud service? 
Hopefully someone will step up to do the research on what is required, and will 
set up a Proof-of-Concept.

3. What will hosting a cloud service cost? Would it be a pay-as-you-use model? 
Would we be asking the OSGeo Foundation to sponsor? Would we be asking workshop 
providers to pay for the service?
I suspect that we could ask the OSGeo Foundation for base funding to prove a 
Proof of Concept (by paying for a cloud service for 1 year or so), but ask 
workshop providers and other users to pay for the service in moving forward.
This is something that can be decided once costs are understood.

4. But the bottom line is that the best chance of success will occur if someone 
stands up and champions its development.  Do we have someone interested to do 
the hard work of making it happen? (Speak up if interested). It certainly would 
be a valuable contribution to the OSGeo community.


Warm regards, Cameron


On 14/10/2015 7:59 pm, Peter Baumann wrote:
>  1.Do you think it is important to have a cloud service that runs the 
> OSGeo-Live VM
not necessarily a cloud, as the whole OSGeo Live is not prepared.
But definitely hosting it on a VM (for easy cloning + move) is an asset - any
demo just needs to show a URL then.


>
>  2.What are the steps that we need to take to make this possible
find a caretaker with a machine.
Jacobs University can do that, for example, in tight collaboration with Angelos
on technical level.

-Peter



On 15/10/2015 2:53 am, Giuseppe Amatulli wrote:
Hi,
under the http://www.spatial-ecology.net/ initiative we  use the the 
OSGeo-Llive for courses and intensive training in Geo Computation.

In this line we have been used also Amazon Web Service to teach remote 
connection and scripting routines in the cloud. For this I was customize a 
Ubuntu Instance very similar to the  OSGeo-Llive.

Nonetheless, would be grate  to have the OSGeo-Llive directly hosted in AWS to 
allow teach but also to provide to the course participants  something that they 
can use after the course.

The AWS Educate 

 provide grants for education so maybe an official cooperation OSGeo can be 
a solution to host for free a OSGeo-Llive Instance

Best Regards
Giuseppe

On 10/13/2015 05:57 PM, Suchith Anand wrote:
>Hi all,
>
>
>Myself, Maria and Peter are now at ESA event and had a chance to catch up on 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?

[Markus Neteler]

On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Mateusz Loskot  wrote:
...
> Finally, with Sandro, we brainstormed idea of surveing the Community
> about their hosting needs/preferences.
> Sandro, Martin, Alex, have been putting efforts into setting up Git,
> improving Trac, and overall improvements.
> Those efforts might be wasted, in case projects will move to GitHub.

There are also projects which do not plan at all to move to git/GitHub.
Or those who just use GitHub as a mirror of their SVN repo.

Markus
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo guidelines for code hosting ?

[Mateusz Loskot]

On 18 October 2015 at 08:41, Andrea Aime  wrote:
>
> In particular, looking at GeoServer experience from the switch, it's rather
> evident we got more people contributing right the moment we did the
> switch
> [...]
> There is however a downside of that, most of these contributions are "one 
> time gigs",
> people help addressing the particular pitfall concerning them and then they 
> move on:
> github did not change the number of core developers, it just increased a lot 
> the
> number of other contributors.
>
> This kind of automation is also rather beneficial to filter our bad 
> contributions... which is
> the dark side of lower contribution barrier, core devs have to spend quite 
> some time evaluating
> pull requests... but ending up with a long queue of them gives a bad 
> impression about the project
> openness. So yeah, another bit to consider I guess, is the project ready to 
> take on them?

I can confirm Andrea's observations.
I have observed very similar trends since moving one of OSS projects
from SourceForge to GitHub.
From an ad-hoc contributor POV, the SourceForge infrastructure was
unfriendly, badly designed,
with lack of proper UX approach. Switch to the "awesome UX" platform
like GitHub released
those dormant potential.

The new benefits introduced new costs in peer reviews and maintenance.

Best regards,
-- 
Mateusz  Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss