Vaclav,
Please accept my sincere apologies as it was my mistake that i did not think on
this when we started the ICA-OSGeo Labs initiative (so many things were going
on at that time!).
In universities, we generally use the Labs term to refer to
infrastructure/people/facilities for a
Vašku,
just side note: yes, whith the new Labs initiative OSGeo-Labs have to
change their name.
My idea would rather be to get rid of current OSGeo- labs and projects
and start with new OSGeo-projects and metioned star (or similar) rating
system.
Than for current OSGeo-Labs OSGeo-project level
Hi Cameron,
It is difficult for OSGeo to stop a vendor from promoting their product,
or promoting a specific lock in strategy.
Of course. That was exactly my point.
But we can:
* Support the OGC in developing an OGC standard for LiDAR. Once a
standard is in place, there is a much
The ASPRS LAS committee has been roundly criticized in the past for not
operating in an open, consensus-driven, transparent manner.
My personal feeling is that LAS - or any future lidar standard - is now too
important a topic to be left to the ASPRS committee. The OGC model and the
Hi Even,
It is difficult for OSGeo to stop a vendor from promoting their product,
or promoting a specific lock in strategy.
But we can:
* Support the OGC in developing an OGC standard for LiDAR. Once a
standard is in place, there is a much stronger reason to make use of
that Open Standard.
Stefan,
That a proprietary vendor decides not to implement a standard in its products
is mainly its problem (as well as the one of its customers). Especially as
they are plenty of FOSS alternatives that implement the standard! So I'd say
it is a selling point for FOSS.
The annoying thing here
Even,
You wrote:
The annoying thing here is that a proprietary vendor aggressively pushes his
*closed* format and tries to undermine an open format implemented by FOSS.
Youre right. But to me the case is quite similar with respect to
undermine GeoPackage despite release announcements and OGC
Wow, lots and lots of FOSS4G-NA people sign up at the last moment
apparently! :-) It is going to be a vibrant conference indeed. Thanks so
much for the great support.
I wanted to share some good news, for those that still might like to
come, we have extended the low pricing for 4 more days.
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 6:44 AM, Jachym Cepicky jachym.cepi...@gmail.com
wrote:
former OSGeo Labs (now it has no name is slowly forgotten in past, but
you can find more at http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Labs)
Hi Jachym,
do you think that with the renewal you can replace the name OSGeo Labs
I think we could Vaclav. One of the more extreme ideas I have had is to
just call it incubation and only assign mentors when a project has
completed each of the five things we expect and wants a review /
recommendation. It would free us up to take on more projects (no longer
bottle necked on
10 matches
Mail list logo
