Hi all,
sorry for coming so late in this thread but I would like to try rephrase what
Bart said to the following:
On one hand you have a Foundation, let’s name it OSGeo, which is willing to be
more professional at organizing the FOSS4G and searching for the help of a
professional organization
Hey Jeff,
can you please at least give the board a chance to form an opinion on this? If
it ever gets to the point that a motion is on the table and you have not been
persuaded, you can always vote -1.
I feel you’re prohibiting the discussions from happening at the board level at
all with
Hi Bart,
On Wed, 17. Sep 2014 at 09:49:51 +0200, Bart van den Eijnden wrote:
can you please at least give the board a chance to form an opinion on this?
If it ever gets to the point that a motion is on the table and you have not
been persuaded, you can always vote -1.
Did an essential piece
Hi Jurgen,
some of the discussions started on the conference e-mail list a while back
(http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/) but only recently this
discussion moved to the discuss list. That might explain some of the confusion.
I don’t think there is any information which is not
Dear Bart, Jürgen, All
Here's a few thoughts that are probably a good place to start. We
started to get into them at Saturday's board meeting. Feedback here is
very welcome.
1) The FOSS4G North America 2015 https://2015.foss4g-na.org/ site
mentions the event is a collaborative event by
@lists.osgeo.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
Dear Bart, Jürgen, All
Here's a few thoughts that are probably a good place to start. We started to
get into them at Saturday's board meeting. Feedback here is very welcome.
1) The FOSS4G North America 2015 https://2015.foss4g-na.org
Guys,
several points:
as Bart pointed out, the discussion still continues. I personally am
not sure, whether this decision should go to board itself, whether
conference committee should be involved in the decision as well.
I welcome Andrew's motions, since that is something, we can vote
about
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2014 4:59 AM
To: Jody Garnett
Cc: OSGeo Discussions; Daniel Morissette
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
What about speeding OSGeo incubation in a way, that projects, who made it
through locationtech, would have to work only at the differences between both
Cepicky
*Sent:* Monday, September 15, 2014 4:59 AM
*To:* Jody Garnett
*Cc:* OSGeo Discussions; Daniel Morissette
*Subject:* Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
What about speeding OSGeo incubation in a way, that projects, who made
it through locationtech, would have to work only at the differences
: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 9:33 AM
To: discuss@lists.osgeo.org
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
Bob,
For what it's worth, and it's the same at OSGeo of course, LocationTech the
Eclipse Foundation want projects to want to join. It's always optional.
It is unlikely for the foreseeable
Hi Bart,
Sort of off topic, the timing was good for me to get into my truck and
drive 5 hours by myself this morning at 5am, to a meeting in cute small
island province, Prince Edward Island
(http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/46.25739/-63.13748). In other
words, I had lots of time to
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Jeff McKenna jmcke...@gatewaygeomatics.com
wrote:
I am also pondering of suggesting to the Board, later when we get to that
point, of possibly querying the Charter Members, in a referendum of
sorts. Not sure, I'm just speaking openly here.
Please do. As I
Hi Jachym, Andrew and others,
Most of what you wrote below Jachym sounds good. I've written an email [1]
about the FOSS4G trademark to the board and conference list and feel that the
way the FOSS4G NA 2015 now uses the FOSS4G trademark, with OSGeo and
LocationTech as equal collaborators, does
Puneet,
I agree with you, this is an hot decision that cannot be taken by a small
group of people without at least have heard about what the *OSGeo community*
think about.
In this tread I have learnt a lot on LocationTech and on motivation that
pushed some OSGeo members to embrace also
The video under question is here: https://vimeo.com/106232256
We’ve got about 50% of the videos up, but the remainder will have to wait a
week since we’ve hit our weekly upload limits on vimeo.
Darrell
On Sep 15, 2014, at 13:37, Kristin Bott bo...@reed.edu wrote:
Kathleen Danielson's talk
Dear All,
Discussions started informally back in 2011. By 2012, there were more
formal discussions ongoing including a face to face meeting with Michael
Gerlek who was appointed by the OSGeo board to represent OSGeo. I wanted
to say publicly that Michael's work was extremely professional and
Hello everyone,
To clarify publicly, I have no problem with LocationTech, and in fact I
feel that its foundation plays an important role in our ecosystem.
The issue actually boils down to OSGeo's only event, FOSS4G. We, as
OSGeo, present this event each year and it is a large part of our
Jeff, Everyone
I'd like to try using a metaphor in case it might help.
Imagine FOSS4G as an open source library. Rather than create a new
library that does pretty much the same thing, many feel that a single
vibrant library in this case is the best thing for the ecosystem.
Hopefully this is
What about speeding OSGeo incubation in a way, that projects, who made it
through locationtech, would have to work only at the differences between
both incubations, afaik the community aspect and maybe something else, in
order to make it to OSGeo project? It would be more easy for them to make
it
Not only is that a great idea Jachym - it is already happening.
MarbleGIS works with kde.org and had an easier go of OSGeo incubation as a
result. KDE is very strict about headers - so they were in good shape. KDE
had some policies to follow, so many of our questions about how the
project was
nice, so if I correctly interpret your recommended path would be:
1) apply to LocationTech (which is faster then OSGeo incubation) and then
2) when passed apply also to become an OSGeo project
Some FOSS4G projects are GPL... (I think of GRASS for example), what these
project should do as, if I
Hi Maxi, All,
You raise an excellent question and the answer varies depending on what
one is looking for. This whole discussion should help understand why
both organizations are complementary and not really competing that much.
Jody and Rob already pointed out some similarities and
Daniel, I would see this similarly, thanks
J
Send from cellphone
--
Jachym Cepicky
e-mail: jachym.cepicky gmail com
URL: http://les-ejk.cz
GPG: http://les-ejk.cz/pgp/JachymCepicky.pgp
Give your code freedom with PyWPS -http://pywps.wald.intevation.org
On Sep 15, 2014 6:31 PM, Daniel
Crap - I guess this means I better set up another incubation committee
meeting :)
There was a great talk at foss4g about burnout (anyone got a link?). I
always try and respect the volunteers I am working with ...
Rant: Please remember that YOU are a volunteer you are working with,
respect your
Kathleen Danielson's talk can be found here:
http://kathleen.getcourse.com/embed.html?course=74708aa8-d180-4482-bdff-da740e27eec9#/
Recorded sessions aren't up yet, but I know Darrell is working on it.
-k.bott
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Jody Garnett jody.garn...@gmail.com
wrote:
Crap -
Good questions Rich. I had never heard of LocationTech until this
discussion started, which indicates to me how removed I am from this
discussion (and general OSGeo day-to-day admin/affairs). Nevertheless,
seems like everything is sorted out and everyone is happy. Let's get back
to coding and
On 9/16/2014 10:48 AM, Richard Greenwood wrote:
I don't get it, and my question is moot at this point in time, but why do
we need a new foundation? Why couldn't OSGeo have provided what
LocationTech purports to provide? Was there any discussion, or awareness,
in the OSGeo board prior to the
I guess the quick answer is that the Eclipse Foundation is not new :) You
can watch a lots of organisations starting to take on location as GIS goes
more mainstream. OGC is working with W3C, Eclipse has LocationTech, Apache
has a spatial information systems group.
Personally I think using the
Short term answer is that there was a bit
http://www.eclipse.org/org/press-release/20130205_ef_enables_locationtech.php
of
http://www.directionsmag.com/articles/locationtech-the-next-step-for-the-open-source-geospatial-software-com/308459
publicity
Okay then I have 2 follow-up questions for you and/or Jeff:
1) do you acknowledge we have a problem with FOSS4G organising?
2) what other solutions to this problem do you see and why are they better than
co-organising with Eclipse/LocationTech?
Bart
Sent from my iPhone
On 14 sep. 2014, at
Barend,
I’m talking about the “burn-out signals that have been given recently by the
current LOC (mostly because they have to re-invent the wheel every year and do
a lot more than can be expected from them).
So IMHO organising it this way is not sustainable in the long run, past
organisers
Guys,
as long as I understand it: some members of the community are scared
of LocationTech taking over whatever (FOSS4G conference, OSGeo
projects and community). This can be based on real action, taken on
either site, unofficial statement, misunderstandings or personal
dislikes.
Yesterday, we
Dear Jachym, Everyone
Just a few quite thoughts.
I encourage anyone who has concerns, or fears anything resembling a
take-over to please speak up on the list, off-list with any other person
from OSGeo me, or even just me in private. We, people involved with
both OSGeo LocationTech, have
FWIW I'm happy to hear that there was such a face to face discussion. I
believe that open communication on the issues will be the best way to
address the fears and find ways to move forward in the best interest of
the overall worldwide community of people, businesses, institutions, etc
who
Looking forward to see things happen.
Good luck
Jachym
2014-09-14 17:07 GMT+02:00 Andrew Ross andrew.r...@eclipse.org:
Dear Jachym, Everyone
Just a few quite thoughts.
I encourage anyone who has concerns, or fears anything resembling a
take-over to please speak up on the list, off-list
Thanks for letting us/me know about this plan Claude, it is really
wonderful that you are planning a 10-year FOSS4G reunion event in
Lausanne. I encourage all communities that are thinking of hosting 2016
to begin preparing their bids, and we will make sure to get the 2016 bid
out shortly.
Good questions/discussion:
Going to chime in as I enjoy both working with OSGeo incubation and
LocationTech. I am a couple timezones west of Daniel but sleep is on the
horizon.
TLDR: I am not 100% positive of either organisation, which is why I am
trying to make them better.
--
Jody Garnett
On
Dear Jeff, Everyone,
I'll drop in to help as well. I may be a little late as I promised my children
a video chat. I apologize as I'd like to be there and help.
For what it's worth, regarding the tag line agenda item, OSGeo is far from the
only open source community. Unaffiliated projects in
Hi Andrew,
Sure, sounds good.
Responding to your comment, we now work closely with several foundations
(ISPRS, ICA, GLTN, and soon GSDI, are examples that I have met with
recently personally).
There does seem to be something different about the way LocationTech is
handing this, seems
Jeff,
I'm not sure what LocationTech has to do with this topic? Please let me
know if I'm missing something.
In case it wasn't perfectly clear, I'm happy to state, there's no
pressure whatsoever from LocationTech in terms of OSGeo's brand. I get
that some feel LocationTech's mere existence
Dear All,
On 2014/09/14 0:11, Jeff McKenna wrote:
Responding to your comment, we now work closely with several
foundations (ISPRS, ICA, GLTN, and soon GSDI, are examples that I have
met with recently personally).
There does seem to be something different about the way LocationTech
is
Fair enough - one thing that would be nice to do, at the code sprint if it
would not be too disruptive, is ask the projects represented there what we
could do to help. Or perhaps better asked as what help is needed :)
Jody Garnett
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Seven se...@arnulf.us wrote:
42 matches
Mail list logo
