[OSGeo-Discuss] **GISCorps Volunteers Needed for an Urgent Project**
Title: Subject of the email: I just received this notice from GISCorps. Although they state Google Earth as the platform, I imagine any software that accepts the Google Earth web service and produces output in KML format would work as well. Any use of an alternate platform would have to be transparent to UNOSAT, as I am sure they don't have any spare time to deal with that issue. - Tara * Project Title: Compiling Infrastructure damage data (buildings, ports, bridges) in Cyclone Nargis affected areas in Myanmar in Google Earth (GE) environment Number of Volunteers: 20 Volunteers for this project must: 1. Have experience working in Google Earth environment; able to create various features in GE environment 2. Basic knowledge in geo-coding and database manipulation 3. Able to spend +/-8 hours per day on the project during the next 5-7 days. 4. This position does NOT require traveling and is conducted remotely. You will be using your own computer for this project and communicating with UNOSAT Project Manager via email and FTP. If you are interested and available, please send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] as soon as possible and no later than Monday May 12th. If any changes have been made to your resume since you signed up with GISCorps, attach an updated version to your email. Most importantly, please only respond if you can work +/- 8 hours per day on this project during the next 5-7 days starting May 12th. Thank you, The GISCorps Core Committee www.giscorps.org ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[OSGeo-Discuss] Options for a Java Collaboration Mailing List
It looks like the Java collaboration idea is starting to warm up. Several programmers from the different Java GIS projects have been exchanging e-mails, and someone suggested we start a mailing list to discuss collaboration issues. We'd like to have this mailing list affiliated with the OSGeo if there are no objections from members. This would give the list a neutral tone and would help integrate efforts at collaboration into the GeoTools fold. Are there any objections to setting up a mailing list for this purpose? Would an existing list, like the standards list, be a better option? Thanks, Landon Warning: Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately.___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects
Frank Warmerdam wrote: ""Real artists ship. For everyone else, there is wanking." For the record, while I acknowledge a kernel of truth in this, I find the statement so elitist and dismissive of the varied efforts that it takes to make things work that I cringe every time I hear it. Discussion, conferences, standards, coordination, etc all play an important role in making a software ecosystem useful. If there is a lesson, it may be that these other things shouldn't become so all consuming that they prevent actually producing useful software. Well said! And let me add: lab directors (academic and commercial), proposal writers, IT managers who recognize the value of open-sourcing internally generated code, research funding agencies (DARPA and NSF program managers!) - i.e., those who find ways to pay people's salaries to write code - are an important part of the ecosystem. -- Miles R. Fidelman, Director of Government Programs Traverse Technologies 145 Tremont Street, 3rd Floor Boston, MA 02111 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 617-395-8254 www.traversetechnologies.com ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects
Jo, You wrote: " I really enjoyed the recent discussion here about non-developers contributions to open source projects and communities. Writing documentation and tutorials and maintaining translations, in particular. That code-jockey primacy attitude is potentially alienating to people wanting to contribute this kind of hard work." It is interesting that you bring this up. Almost all of our documentation and translation work at OpenJUMP is done by non-programmers active in the community. In fact, I even take care of commiting updated translation files to the SVN for one of these users. Without these efforts, we might not ever get anything documented. :] You wrote: " At least Autodesk, for example, saw this and made bona fide effort to "build community", rather than dropping millions of lines of undocumented, hard-to-configure code onto the net, hoping an imaginary "open source community" would sprinkle pixie dust onto it, as Sun did at first - as if the time and goodwill of potential contributors were inexhaustible." Excellent point. It takes more than pixie dust to build a healthy community around an open source software project. Landon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 7:27 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 05:14:40PM -0500, P Kishor wrote: > On 5/8/08, Schuyler Erle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > is that the number-one sine-qua-non of *any* potentially successful > > software project is *shipping working code*. > > Until a developer does that, the discussion of whether or not his/her > > project needs or deserves institutional/organizational support That is not what this discussion is about, though. (And the point seems self-evident, given this is a discussion about open source software projects, defined by having working code "in the wild") > Steve Coast (OSM) echoed the same sentiment very elegantly -- "Real > artists ship. For everyone else, there is wanking." > After a short hesitation, I have really come to appreciate it. Yup, > unless there is working code, everything else -- sponsorships, > organization, standards, committees, mailing lists -- is pointless. I really enjoyed the recent discussion here about non-developers contributions to open source projects and communities. Writing documentation and tutorials and maintaining translations, in particular. That code-jockey primacy attitude is potentially alienating to people wanting to contribute this kind of hard work. For many it is easy to write software. There is a lot of code out there, a lot of abandon-ware, projects that are "free" by a legal definition but with none of the supporting infrastructure that helps them to get used and to acquire a client base. At least Autodesk, for example, saw this and made bona fide effort to "build community", rather than dropping millions of lines of undocumented, hard-to-configure code onto the net, hoping an imaginary "open source community" would sprinkle pixie dust onto it, as Sun did at first - as if the time and goodwill of potential contributors were inexhaustible. There is this cultural pressure on "standards" to be marketing tools. Because of the government and military context for GIS, this pressure is particularly intense for us. It starts to loop back on itself somewhat like this, http://frot.org/on_standards/statements.html This does have a countereffect on innovation in software and it also probably does prevent "bona fide" standards developing in a natural way. As well as creating this terrific and largely justified backlash against some of the in-a-vacuum work done by OGC, ISO. (GeoDRM anyone) However the process of working things out by rough consensus and running code takes longer, business process says, "first to market -> "natural monopoly| de facto standard". It is unfortunate, because proper interoperability can be such a force for good - cf MetaCRS, and the future time and hassle that is going to be saved for many people, once the inevitable initial round of talking is done. I know, this argument has gone round and round in the past, and many are impatient with philosophising. I hope that philosophising can sometimes provide energysaving insight, or i wouldnt engage in it. But repeating "without code, you are nothing" grates on the nerves after a while. jo -- ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss Warning: Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 05:14:40PM -0500, P Kishor wrote: On 5/8/08, Schuyler Erle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: is that the number-one sine-qua-non of *any* potentially successful software project is *shipping working code*. Until a developer does that, the discussion of whether or not his/her project needs or deserves institutional/organizational support That is not what this discussion is about, though. (And the point seems self-evident, given this is a discussion about open source software projects, defined by having working code "in the wild") I would beg to differ. There's a lot that goes on BEFORE working code is released into the wild. And very often, institutional support is what makes it possible to write code and release it into the wild. In a previous life, I ran a small hosting business, and relied entirely on open source code. With the exception of Linux - admittedly a big exception - everything else I was running had institutional origins, with significant amounts of funding supporting the original developers. Of particular note: Apache: started as the NCSA daemon, funded largely by NSF (if I recall correctly) Sendmail: derived from ARPANET delivermail, developed in the university environment Sympa: open-source mailing list manager developed/supported by consortium of French universities These days, one of the things I do for a living is pursue government funding so that our firm can develop new software. One of our current projects very explicitly commits, contractually, to releasing our results under the GPL. (Historical note: until the late 70s/early 80s, work performed with government funding was generally released into the public domain - and an awful lot of today's technology base dates back to those years. IMHO, open source licenses are a reaction to the change in policy that allows companies to maintain proprietary rights to publicly funded work). Miles -- Miles R. Fidelman, Director of Government Programs Traverse Technologies 145 Tremont Street, 3rd Floor Boston, MA 02111 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 617-395-8254 www.traversetechnologies.com ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects
I wasn't trying to apply this quote to all forms of non-programming support on open source projects. I was applying it to programmers like myself, that have 52 projects in their Eclipse IDE, but only two Ant scripts that actually produce a working JAR file on a regular basis. It seems my bad habit of starting things before I complete existing tasks flourishes in my programming. That is the type of wanking to which I referred. :] Landon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frank Warmerdam Sent: Friday, May 09, 2008 7:29 AM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects > ""Real artists ship. For everyone else, there is wanking." Folks, For the record, while I acknowledge a kernel of truth in this, I find the statement so elitist and dismissive of the varied efforts that it takes to make things work that I cringe every time I hear it. Discussion, conferences, standards, coordination, etc all play an important role in making a software ecosystem useful. If there is a lesson, it may be that these other things shouldn't become so all consuming that they prevent actually producing useful software. Needless to say, by the standard of this statement I'm a wanker for bothering to point this out, and you folks are all wankers for repeating SteveC's bon mot. Best regards, -- ---+ -- I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, [EMAIL PROTECTED] light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam and watch the world go round - Rush| President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss Warning: Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects
""Real artists ship. For everyone else, there is wanking." Folks, For the record, while I acknowledge a kernel of truth in this, I find the statement so elitist and dismissive of the varied efforts that it takes to make things work that I cringe every time I hear it. Discussion, conferences, standards, coordination, etc all play an important role in making a software ecosystem useful. If there is a lesson, it may be that these other things shouldn't become so all consuming that they prevent actually producing useful software. Needless to say, by the standard of this statement I'm a wanker for bothering to point this out, and you folks are all wankers for repeating SteveC's bon mot. Best regards, -- ---+-- I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, [EMAIL PROTECTED] light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam and watch the world go round - Rush| President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects
On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 05:14:40PM -0500, P Kishor wrote: > On 5/8/08, Schuyler Erle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > is that the number-one sine-qua-non of *any* potentially successful > > software project is *shipping working code*. > > Until a developer does that, the discussion of whether or not his/her > > project needs or deserves institutional/organizational support That is not what this discussion is about, though. (And the point seems self-evident, given this is a discussion about open source software projects, defined by having working code "in the wild") > Steve Coast (OSM) echoed the same sentiment very elegantly -- "Real > artists ship. For everyone else, there is wanking." > After a short hesitation, I have really come to appreciate it. Yup, > unless there is working code, everything else -- sponsorships, > organization, standards, committees, mailing lists -- is pointless. I really enjoyed the recent discussion here about non-developers contributions to open source projects and communities. Writing documentation and tutorials and maintaining translations, in particular. That code-jockey primacy attitude is potentially alienating to people wanting to contribute this kind of hard work. For many it is easy to write software. There is a lot of code out there, a lot of abandon-ware, projects that are "free" by a legal definition but with none of the supporting infrastructure that helps them to get used and to acquire a client base. At least Autodesk, for example, saw this and made bona fide effort to "build community", rather than dropping millions of lines of undocumented, hard-to-configure code onto the net, hoping an imaginary "open source community" would sprinkle pixie dust onto it, as Sun did at first - as if the time and goodwill of potential contributors were inexhaustible. There is this cultural pressure on "standards" to be marketing tools. Because of the government and military context for GIS, this pressure is particularly intense for us. It starts to loop back on itself somewhat like this, http://frot.org/on_standards/statements.html This does have a countereffect on innovation in software and it also probably does prevent "bona fide" standards developing in a natural way. As well as creating this terrific and largely justified backlash against some of the in-a-vacuum work done by OGC, ISO. (GeoDRM anyone) However the process of working things out by rough consensus and running code takes longer, business process says, "first to market -> "natural monopoly| de facto standard". It is unfortunate, because proper interoperability can be such a force for good - cf MetaCRS, and the future time and hassle that is going to be saved for many people, once the inevitable initial round of talking is done. I know, this argument has gone round and round in the past, and many are impatient with philosophising. I hope that philosophising can sometimes provide energysaving insight, or i wouldnt engage in it. But repeating "without code, you are nothing" grates on the nerves after a while. jo -- ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[OSGeo-Discuss] FOSS4G 2008 CFP reminder and workshop news
FOSS4G 2008 CFP reminder and workshop news Free and Open Source Geospatial 2008, Cape Town, South Africa. September 29 - Oct 3 2008. incorporating GISSA 2008. Reminder: The paper / presentation submission deadline is this coming Monday 12 May. Go to http://www.foss4g2008.org and click on 'Call for Papers'. Early-bird registration closes on 15th June, so register soon! FOSS4G is renowned for its hands-on WORKSHOPS and LABS. 2008 is no exception. The Workshop/labs track has been going well in terms of submissions. We have (as of 9th May 2008) 26 interesting and relevant submissions to choose from, ranging across a wide spectrum of GIS topics. Desktop GIS (with spatial analysis and geovisualization to the fore) is a common theme and there is a strong representation from the broad Internet GIS field (web map servers, rich internet applications/web clients, OGC web services). Themes also making an appearance are geoportals, metadata, spatial ETL and the use of spatial databases. There is also some focus on programming/scripting. The emphasis is heavily on showing what is possible with FOSS4G through practical "how-to's", getting software/services up and running quickly and trying them out. Many of the workshops emphasise the excellent Java-based tools and frameworks. 90 minute Labs are included in the core conference package. Register for the full 5 day package and get to attend up to three 4 hour workshops free! Submit your abstract soon. Come and have a bash in Cape Town. Gavin Fleming FOSS4G 2008 Conference Chair www.foss4g2008.org PS: Please distribute this notice widely, blog about FOSS4G 2008, add a banner to your website. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects
""Real artists ship. For everyone else, there is wanking." I'm going to add that to my book of favorite quotes. To bad it means I'm a wanker myself... Landon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of P Kishor Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 3:15 PM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects On 5/8/08, Schuyler Erle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 2008-05-08 at 12:03 +0200, Mateusz Loskot wrote: > > > Yes it does. Karl Fogel describes it very well in his book > > (http://producingoss.com). I strongly recommend it to project leaders > > and developers who maintain just-opened and want to get dirty with > > principles of the FOSS world. > > > One important point that Fogel makes that I think is worth noting here > is that the number-one sine-qua-non of *any* potentially successful > software project is *shipping working code*. > > Until a developer does that, the discussion of whether or not his/her > project needs or deserves institutional/organizational support to > succeed further is moot. Steve Coast (OSM) echoed the same sentiment very elegantly -- "Real artists ship. For everyone else, there is wanking." After a short hesitation, I have really come to appreciate it. Yup, unless there is working code, everything else -- sponsorships, organization, standards, committees, mailing lists -- is pointless. Smart guy, that Coast. > > SDE > ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss Warning: Information provided via electronic media is not guaranteed against defects including translation and transmission errors. If the reader is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender immediately. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] scale of FOSS projects
Tim Bowden wrote: On Thu, 2008-05-08 at 21:28 -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote: Michael P. Gerlek wrote: Or, to quote the IETF, "rough consensus and running code". Except that the reference is to the informal criteria for when one might even beginning to firm up a standard. In the IETF community - unlike pretty much every other standards body on the planet - there's a pretty strong insistence that there are multiple implementations of something, that an talk to each other, before even thinking about pinning down anything that looks like a standard. IMHO standards are just a fancy way of documenting the solution. Until you've build the solution, you don't understand the problem properly [1]. If you try and write your standard while your understanding of the solution space is underdeveloped, you'll end up with a pile of shite. We're in violent agreement here. Unfortunately, outside the IETF world, that's how standards are done - to just the effect you describe. But that's really besides the point - which is that that the IETF quote does not refer to the subject at hand (the cost/scale of software development, the degree to which institutional support is called for, and when support is needed) but to a philosophy of when to standardize communications protocols. Miles -- Miles R. Fidelman, Director of Government Programs Traverse Technologies 145 Tremont Street, 3rd Floor Boston, MA 02111 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 617-395-8254 www.traversetechnologies.com ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
