[OSGeo-Discuss] Polling charter members

[Helmut Kudrnovsky]

I second Jachym and Peter.

 

>Peter Baumann:
>
>HI all,
>
>As there is a request for Charter Members to chime in, here my 2 cents:
>
>The issue on hand is highlighting excellently the need for effective and
>efficient decision procedures based on mandates.
>OSGeo has but embarked on establishing these, currently discussions are driven
>more by gut feeling than by ordered bylaws and procedures. The fact that there
>are projects in incubation for 4.5 years [1] and still not done underlines this.
>
>A grassroots mindset is good for gathering people initially, but to exercise
>impact at large we need efficient, agreed decision structures. With some of the
>last posts I see that we are embarking in this direction, and I very much
>applaude to that.

 


Jachym Cepicky:
>>So, now



>> we are here, things are happening, we can finally talk to whole
>> community, because of this IMHO *is* important topic - two big
>> organisations are trying to find a way, how to cooperate in the future
>> for better free and open source software for geospatial! This is good.
>> If for nothing else, then for clarifying OSGeo's position.

 

on the horizon I see 3 (already worked on) tasks of the OSGeo foundation:

 

(a) service/infrastructure provider for foss4g projects,
(b) open minded community nucleus of foss4g spirit,
(c) business support for foss4g

 

as OSGeo is happily growing :-) and has reached a "critical" size, well reviewed structures are needed to work on all or some of these tasks, alone or in cooperation with other organisations ... let's find OSGeo's position.

 

best

Helmut

 

OSGeo: wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Hellik

 
>Peter Baumann:
>
>HI all,
>
>As there is a request for Charter Members to chime in, here my 2 cents:
>
>The issue on hand is highlighting excellently the need for effective and
>efficient decision procedures based on mandates.
>OSGeo has but embarked on establishing these, currently discussions are driven
>more by gut feeling than by ordered bylaws and procedures. The fact that there
>are projects in incubation for 4.5 years [1] and still not done underlines this.
>
>A grassroots mindset is good for gathering people initially, but to exercise
>impact at large we need efficient, agreed decision structures. With some of the
>last posts I see that we are embarking in this direction, and I very much
>applaude to that.
>
>cheers,
>Peter
>
>[1] http://rasdaman.org/wiki/OSGeo
>
>
>On 09/18/2014 09:59 AM, Ravi Kumar wrote:
>> This ' LocationTech and OSGeo collaboration ', appears to be some thing that
>> the OSGeo Charter should involve and motivate opinion etc. Those at the helm
>> may pl post a summary of the, 'storey so far'.
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, September 18, 2014 2:23 AM, Jachym Cepicky
>>  wrote:
>>
>>
>> Just noting,
>>
>> discussion about relationship between LocationTech and OSGeo is here
>> since 2012 (IIRC). That many people did not pain attention to it
>> (actually including myself up to certain time), is not fault of OSGeo
>> .. or LocationTech.
>>
>> It's just actually boring topic. We are community of (mostly)
>> developers and users of FOSS4G (not conference, but software in this
>> case). This sounds like politics .. who would pay attention? So, now
>> we are here, things are happening, we can finally talk to whole
>> community, because of this IMHO *is* important topic - two big
>> organisations are trying to find a way, how to cooperate in the future
>> for better free and open source software for geospatial! This is good.
>> If for nothing else, then for clarifying OSGeo's position.
>>
>> Jachym
 



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

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Polling charter members

[Peter Baumann]

HI all,

As there is a request for Charter Members to chime in, here my 2 cents:

The issue on hand is highlighting excellently the need for effective and 
efficient decision procedures based on mandates.
OSGeo has but embarked on establishing these, currently discussions are driven 
more by gut feeling than by ordered bylaws and procedures. The fact that there 
are projects in incubation for 4.5 years [1] and still not done underlines this.


A grassroots mindset is good for gathering people initially, but to exercise 
impact at large we need efficient, agreed decision structures. With some of the 
last posts I see that we are embarking in this direction, and I very much 
applaude to that.


cheers,
Peter

[1] http://rasdaman.org/wiki/OSGeo


On 09/18/2014 09:59 AM, Ravi Kumar wrote:
This ' LocationTech and OSGeo collaboration ', appears to be some thing that 
the OSGeo Charter should involve and motivate opinion etc. Those at the helm 
may pl post a summary of the, 'storey so far'.



On Thursday, September 18, 2014 2:23 AM, Jachym Cepicky 
 wrote:



Just noting,

discussion about relationship between LocationTech and OSGeo is here
since 2012 (IIRC). That many people did not pain attention to it
(actually including myself up to certain time), is not fault of OSGeo
.. or LocationTech.

It's just actually boring topic. We are community of (mostly)
developers and users of FOSS4G (not conference, but software in this
case). This sounds like politics .. who would pay attention? So, now
we are here, things are happening, we can finally talk to whole
community, because of this IMHO *is* important topic - two big
organisations are trying to find a way, how to cooperate in the future
for better free and open source software for geospatial! This is good.
If for nothing else, then for clarifying OSGeo's position.

Jachym

2014-09-17 22:42 GMT+02:00 P Kishor >:

> My guess is, just as I do, most Charter Members find this entire thread very
> alien. For us who don't go to FOSS4G, OSGeo means something completely
> different (here is where I disagree with an earlier email--I think it was Jo
> Cook--that folks know OSGeo products but not OSGeo). To suddenly hear of all
> this chatter about FOSS4G being used as a football between OSGeo and
> LocationTech (an org I heard about for the first time also in this thread)
> is like waking up at night to find a bunch of strangers chatting in your
> living room.
>
> Definitely, involving Charter Members would be a very sound and nice thing
> to do.
>
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Steven Feldman > wrote:

>>
>> Before we get to the stage of polling charter members and local chapters,
>> it would be helpful if more of the charter membership and local chapters
>> chipped in with their opinions. Many seem to have been very quiet, i am sure
>> they must have a view
>> __
>> Steven
>>
>>
>> On 17 Sep 2014, at 20:00, conference-europe-requ...@lists.osgeo.org 
 wrote:

>>
>> From: Massimiliano Cannata >

>> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
>> Date: 17 September 2014 19:22:24 BST
>> To: P Kishor mailto:punk.k...@gmail.com>>
>> Cc: OSGeo Discussions >

>>
>>
>> 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 LocationTech. I can really feel
>> the desire to help and foster geospatial open source software from those
>> guys.
>>
>> BTW, I also believe that FOSS4G is the OSGeo event.
>>
>> For this reason I believe that if OSGeo want to change things and share it
>> with LocationTech (not just let them organize it in the name of), we need a
>> deep OSGeo internal discussion at all level: Local Chapters, Charter
>> members, Committees and finally the Board which has the responsibility to
>> vote on this.
>>
>> So, my proposal is:
>> 1) Have a formal proposal from LocationTech which explain terms of
>> collaboration, commitments and guarantees
>> 2) Publish publicly this proposal for a period (let's say 2 week) for
>> people to look into this proposal
>> 3) Call for a vote from charter members
>> 4) Call for a letter of position letter from each committee and local
>> Chapters
>> 5) Publish publicly the results
>> 6) Discuss it on the next board meeting and finally have a vote and a
>> letter of motivation from the Board
>>
>>
>> BTW, the FOSS4G-EUROPE website (http://foss4g-e.org/) states clearly at
>> the home page: "OSGeo's European Conference on Free and Open Source Software
>> for Geospatial".
>>
>>
>> I hope this doesn't hurt anyone, and brings positive point of discussion.
>>
>> It is just my personal thought as a new board member, and sorry 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Polling charter members

[Fenoy Gerald]

Hello, 
well said Gert-Jan.

I would like to say that I feel that the Board is responsible to provide 
decision proposals, giving the full meaning / goals of each decision proposed 
(this is really important to me to be also more open in this part), clarifying 
the proposals may help for better understanding of the Foundation goals and 
should probably help in the past too, to make all the OSGeo Charter Members 
understanding where the Foundation is willing to go.

Then if we have clear defined goals bind to the proposals made then it is more 
fair to ask the Charter Member to vote or amend the decision taken by the Board.

I hope my point is clear,
Best regards,


Le 18 sept. 2014 à 08:14, Maria Antonia Brovelli  a 
écrit :

> +1 for involving charter members
> Maria
> 
> Prof. Maria Antonia Brovelli
> Vice Rector for Como Campus - Politecnico di Milano
> 
> 
> ISPRS WG IV/5 "Web and Cloud Based Geospatial Services and Applications" - 
> Co-chair - OSGeo Charter Member - ICA - OSGeo Advisory Board Member - SIFET 
> Scientific Commitee Member
> 
> Via Natta, 12/14 - 22100 COMO (ITALIA)
> Tel. +39-031-3327336 - Mob. +39-328-0023867 - fax. +39-031-3327321
> e-mail1: maria.brove...@polimi.it
> e-mail2: prorettr...@como.polimi.it
> 
> 
> 
> Da: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org  per 
> conto di Paolo Cavallini 
> Inviato: giovedì 18 settembre 2014 08.03
> A: discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> Oggetto: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Polling charter members
> 
> Il 17/09/2014 22:42, P Kishor ha scritto:
> 
>> also in this thread) is like waking up at night to find a bunch of strangers 
>> chatting
>> in your living room.
>> 
>> Definitely, involving Charter Members would be a very sound and nice thing 
>> to do.
> 
> +1
> I share Puneet feelings.
> All the best.
> 
> --
> Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
> Corsi QGIS e PostGIS: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html
> ___
> 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



Gérald Fenoy
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/User:Djay



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Polling charter members

[Ravi Kumar]

This ' LocationTech and OSGeo collaboration ', appears to be some thing that 
the OSGeo Charter should involve and motivate opinion etc. Those at the helm 
may pl post a summary of the, 'storey so far'. 



On Thursday, September 18, 2014 2:23 AM, Jachym Cepicky 
 wrote:
 


Just noting,

discussion about relationship between LocationTech and OSGeo is here
since 2012
 (IIRC). That many people did not pain attention to it
(actually including myself up to certain time), is not fault of OSGeo
.. or LocationTech.

It's just actually boring topic. We are community of (mostly)
developers and users of FOSS4G (not conference, but software in this
case). This sounds like politics .. who would pay attention? So, now
we are here, things are happening, we can finally talk to whole
community, because of this IMHO *is* important topic - two big
organisations are trying to find a way, how to cooperate in the future
for better free and open source software for geospatial! This is good.
If for nothing else, then for clarifying OSGeo's position.

Jachym

2014-09-17 22:42 GMT+02:00 P Kishor :
> My guess is, just as I do, most Charter Members find this entire thread very
>
 alien. For us who don't go to FOSS4G, OSGeo means something completely
> different (here is where I disagree with an earlier email--I think it was Jo
> Cook--that folks know OSGeo products but not OSGeo). To suddenly hear of all
> this chatter about FOSS4G being used as a football between OSGeo and
> LocationTech (an org I heard about for the first time also in this thread)
> is like waking up at night to find a bunch of strangers chatting in your
> living room.
>
> Definitely, involving Charter Members would be a very sound and nice thing
> to do.
>
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Steven Feldman  wrote:
>>
>> Before we get to the stage of polling charter members and local chapters,
>> it would be helpful if more of the charter membership and local
 chapters
>> chipped in with their opinions. Many seem to have been very quiet, i am sure
>> they must have a view
>> __
>> Steven
>>
>>
>> On 17 Sep 2014, at 20:00, conference-europe-requ...@lists.osgeo.org wrote:
>>
>> From: Massimiliano Cannata 
>> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
>> Date: 17 September 2014 19:22:24 BST
>> To: P Kishor 
>> Cc: OSGeo Discussions 
>>
>>
>> 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 LocationTech. I can really feel
>> the desire to help and foster geospatial open source software from those
>> guys.
>>
>> BTW, I also believe that FOSS4G is the OSGeo event.
>>
>> For this reason I believe that if OSGeo want to change things and share it
>> with LocationTech (not just let them organize it in the name of), we need a
>> deep OSGeo internal discussion at all level: Local Chapters, Charter
>> members,
 Committees and finally the Board which has the responsibility to
>> vote on this.
>>
>> So, my proposal is:
>> 1) Have a formal proposal from LocationTech which explain terms of
>> collaboration, commitments and guarantees
>> 2) Publish publicly this proposal for a period (let's say 2 week) for
>> people to look into this proposal
>> 3) Call for a vote from charter members
>> 4) Call for a letter of position letter from each committee and local
>> Chapters
>> 5) Publish publicly the results
>> 6) Discuss it on the next board meeting and finally have a vote and a
>> letter of motivation from the Board
>>
>>
>> BTW, the FOSS4G-EUROPE website (http://foss4g-e.org/) states clearly at
>> the home page: "OSGeo's European Conference on Free and Open Source
 Software
>> for Geospatial".
>>
>>
>> I hope this doesn't hurt anyone, and brings positive point of discussion.
>>
>> It is just my personal thought as a new board member, and sorry if I've
>> lost some best practice currently in place.
>>
>> Maxi
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
>
> --
> Puneet Kishor
> Manager, Science and Data Policy
> Creative Commons
>
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss



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



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

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Polling charter members

[Maria Antonia Brovelli]

+1 for involving charter members
Maria

Prof. Maria Antonia Brovelli
Vice Rector for Como Campus - Politecnico di Milano


ISPRS WG IV/5 "Web and Cloud Based Geospatial Services and Applications" - 
Co-chair - OSGeo Charter Member - ICA - OSGeo Advisory Board Member - SIFET 
Scientific Commitee Member

Via Natta, 12/14 - 22100 COMO (ITALIA)
Tel. +39-031-3327336 - Mob. +39-328-0023867 - fax. +39-031-3327321
e-mail1: maria.brove...@polimi.it
e-mail2: prorettr...@como.polimi.it



Da: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org  per conto 
di Paolo Cavallini 
Inviato: giovedì 18 settembre 2014 08.03
A: discuss@lists.osgeo.org
Oggetto: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Polling charter members

Il 17/09/2014 22:42, P Kishor ha scritto:

> also in this thread) is like waking up at night to find a bunch of strangers 
> chatting
> in your living room.
>
> Definitely, involving Charter Members would be a very sound and nice thing to 
> do.

+1
I share Puneet feelings.
All the best.

--
Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
Corsi QGIS e PostGIS: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html
___
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] Polling charter members

[Paolo Cavallini]

Il 17/09/2014 22:42, P Kishor ha scritto:

> also in this thread) is like waking up at night to find a bunch of strangers 
> chatting
> in your living room.
> 
> Definitely, involving Charter Members would be a very sound and nice thing to 
> do.

+1
I share Puneet feelings.
All the best.

-- 
Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
Corsi QGIS e PostGIS: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Polling charter members

[Jody Garnett]

I agree it is a bit strange P Kishor:

I helped organise a very small foss4g-au "unconference" in 2012 with Nathan.

A couple weeks ago Rob Emanuele asked if I could help out with foss4g-na -
not sure what I will be doing yet. Rob is a passionate scala developer, and
it is great to see that enthusiasm directed towards holding an event.

I would rather make use of this time to hear tips and tricks for running a
successful regional foss4g event. So if we are playing with a football, at
least we are on the same team.

Cheers,
Jody


Jody Garnett

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 2:42 PM, P Kishor  wrote:

> My guess is, just as I do, most Charter Members find this entire thread
> very alien. For us who don't go to FOSS4G, OSGeo means something completely
> different (here is where I disagree with an earlier email—I think it was Jo
> Cook—that folks know OSGeo products but not OSGeo). To suddenly hear of all
> this chatter about FOSS4G being used as a football between OSGeo and
> LocationTech (an org I heard about for the first time also in this thread)
> is like waking up at night to find a bunch of strangers chatting in your
> living room.
>
> Definitely, involving Charter Members would be a very sound and nice thing
> to do.
>
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Steven Feldman 
> wrote:
>
>> Before we get to the stage of polling charter members and local chapters,
>> it would be helpful if more of the charter membership and local chapters
>> chipped in with their opinions. Many seem to have been very quiet, i am
>> sure they must have a view
>> __
>> Steven
>>
>>
>> On 17 Sep 2014, at 20:00, conference-europe-requ...@lists.osgeo.org
>> wrote:
>>
>> *From: *Massimiliano Cannata 
>> *Subject: **Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo*
>> *Date: *17 September 2014 19:22:24 BST
>> *To: *P Kishor 
>> *Cc: *OSGeo Discussions 
>>
>>
>> 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 LocationTech. I can really feel
>> the desire to help and foster geospatial open source software from those
>> guys.
>>
>> BTW, I also believe that FOSS4G is the OSGeo event.
>>
>> For this reason I believe that if OSGeo want to change things and *share* it
>> with LocationTech (not just let them organize it in the name of), we need a
>> deep OSGeo internal discussion at all level: Local Chapters, Charter
>> members, Committees and finally the Board which has the responsibility to
>> vote on this.
>>
>> So, my proposal is:
>> 1) Have a formal proposal from LocationTech which explain terms of
>> collaboration, commitments and guarantees
>> 2) Publish publicly this proposal for a period (let's say 2 week) for
>> people to look into this proposal
>> 3) Call for a vote from charter members
>> 4) Call for a letter of position letter from each committee and local
>> Chapters
>> 5) Publish publicly the results
>> 6) Discuss it on the next board meeting and finally have a vote and a
>> letter of motivation from the Board
>>
>>
>> BTW, the FOSS4G-EUROPE website (http://foss4g-e.org/) states clearly at
>> the home page: "OSGeo's European Conference on Free and Open Source
>> Software for Geospatial".
>>
>>
>> I hope this doesn't hurt anyone, and brings positive point of discussion.
>>
>> It is just my personal thought as a new board member, and sorry if I've
>> lost some best practice currently in place.
>>
>> Maxi
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Puneet Kishor
> Manager, Science and Data Policy
> Creative Commons
>
> ___
> 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] Polling charter members

[Gert-Jan van der Weijden]

Hi all,

 

I'm also sure all local chapters & charter members have a view, but after
the discussion (or discussions?) over the last days it's not quite clear
what's the topic anyway.

is is about:

- collabaration with any other organisation in general?

- collaboration with LocationTech specifically?

- outsourcing tasks (such as organizing large events, e.g .FOSS4G) 

- outsourcing on a local or on a global scale

 

I agree with Puneet and Massimiliano (and probably serveral others who
dropped out of this discussion anyway) to sort of moderate this discussion
to make sure we're all discussing the same topic. 

In several boards (not specifically osgeo-related, by the way) I have seen
to may discussions/polls/votes that seemed to have ended in an agreement,
but after which the question arose "OK, we've agreed,  but ... agreed on
what?"

 

Seems like a nice taks (for the board, iI guess) to decipher this
spaghetti-like discussion into small, manageble (and preferably appetising)
pieces. 

That will encourage Charter Members & local chapters to (re-)join this
valuable discussion.

 

 

kinds regards,

 

 

Gert-Jan

 

 

 

Van: discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org
[mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] Namens Steven Feldman
Verzonden: woensdag 17 september 2014 22:32
Aan: ; osgeo-board List; conference
Onderwerp: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Polling charter members

 

Before we get to the stage of polling charter members and local chapters, it
would be helpful if more of the charter membership and local chapters
chipped in with their opinions. Many seem to have been very quiet, i am sure
they must have a view

__
Steven




 

On 17 Sep 2014, at 20:00, conference-europe-requ...@lists.osgeo.org wrote:





From: Massimiliano Cannata < <mailto:massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch>
massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch>

Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo

Date: 17 September 2014 19:22:24 BST

To: P Kishor < <mailto:punk.k...@gmail.com> punk.k...@gmail.com>

Cc: OSGeo Discussions < <mailto:discuss@lists.osgeo.org>
discuss@lists.osgeo.org>

 

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 LocationTech. I can really feel
the desire to help and foster geospatial open source software from those
guys.

 

BTW, I also believe that FOSS4G is the OSGeo event. 

 

For this reason I believe that if OSGeo want to change things and share it
with LocationTech (not just let them organize it in the name of), we need a
deep OSGeo internal discussion at all level: Local Chapters, Charter
members, Committees and finally the Board which has the responsibility to
vote on this.

 

So, my proposal is:

1) Have a formal proposal from LocationTech which explain terms of
collaboration, commitments and guarantees

2) Publish publicly this proposal for a period (let's say 2 week) for people
to look into this proposal

3) Call for a vote from charter members

4) Call for a letter of position letter from each committee and local
Chapters

5) Publish publicly the results 

6) Discuss it on the next board meeting and finally have a vote and a letter
of motivation from the Board

 

 

BTW, the FOSS4G-EUROPE website ( <http://foss4g-e.org/>
http://foss4g-e.org/) states clearly at the home page: "OSGeo's European
Conference on Free and Open Source Software for Geospatial".

 

 

I hope this doesn't hurt anyone, and brings positive point of discussion.

 

It is just my personal thought as a new board member, and sorry if I've lost
some best practice currently in place.

 

Maxi

 

 

 

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

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Polling charter members

[P Kishor]

yup, you nailed it. In fact, if the conversation is only about FOSS4G, I
couldn't give a rip. Otoh, if the conversation is about OSGeo, its nature
and what it stands for, I am all ears, and I do believe many other Charter
Members would also want to be included.

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Jachym Cepicky 
wrote:

> Just noting,
>
> discussion about relationship between LocationTech and OSGeo is here
> since 2012 (IIRC). That many people did not pain attention to it
> (actually including myself up to certain time), is not fault of OSGeo
> .. or LocationTech.
>
> It's just actually boring topic. We are community of (mostly)
> developers and users of FOSS4G (not conference, but software in this
> case). This sounds like politics .. who would pay attention? So, now
> we are here, things are happening, we can finally talk to whole
> community, because of this IMHO *is* important topic - two big
> organisations are trying to find a way, how to cooperate in the future
> for better free and open source software for geospatial! This is good.
> If for nothing else, then for clarifying OSGeo's position.
>
> Jachym
>
> 2014-09-17 22:42 GMT+02:00 P Kishor :
> > My guess is, just as I do, most Charter Members find this entire thread
> very
> > alien. For us who don't go to FOSS4G, OSGeo means something completely
> > different (here is where I disagree with an earlier email--I think it
> was Jo
> > Cook--that folks know OSGeo products but not OSGeo). To suddenly hear of
> all
> > this chatter about FOSS4G being used as a football between OSGeo and
> > LocationTech (an org I heard about for the first time also in this
> thread)
> > is like waking up at night to find a bunch of strangers chatting in your
> > living room.
> >
> > Definitely, involving Charter Members would be a very sound and nice
> thing
> > to do.
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Steven Feldman 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Before we get to the stage of polling charter members and local
> chapters,
> >> it would be helpful if more of the charter membership and local chapters
> >> chipped in with their opinions. Many seem to have been very quiet, i am
> sure
> >> they must have a view
> >> __
> >> Steven
> >>
> >>
> >> On 17 Sep 2014, at 20:00, conference-europe-requ...@lists.osgeo.org
> wrote:
> >>
> >> From: Massimiliano Cannata 
> >> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
> >> Date: 17 September 2014 19:22:24 BST
> >> To: P Kishor 
> >> Cc: OSGeo Discussions 
> >>
> >>
> >> 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 LocationTech. I can really
> feel
> >> the desire to help and foster geospatial open source software from those
> >> guys.
> >>
> >> BTW, I also believe that FOSS4G is the OSGeo event.
> >>
> >> For this reason I believe that if OSGeo want to change things and share
> it
> >> with LocationTech (not just let them organize it in the name of), we
> need a
> >> deep OSGeo internal discussion at all level: Local Chapters, Charter
> >> members, Committees and finally the Board which has the responsibility
> to
> >> vote on this.
> >>
> >> So, my proposal is:
> >> 1) Have a formal proposal from LocationTech which explain terms of
> >> collaboration, commitments and guarantees
> >> 2) Publish publicly this proposal for a period (let's say 2 week) for
> >> people to look into this proposal
> >> 3) Call for a vote from charter members
> >> 4) Call for a letter of position letter from each committee and local
> >> Chapters
> >> 5) Publish publicly the results
> >> 6) Discuss it on the next board meeting and finally have a vote and a
> >> letter of motivation from the Board
> >>
> >>
> >> BTW, the FOSS4G-EUROPE website (http://foss4g-e.org/) states clearly at
> >> the home page: "OSGeo's European Conference on Free and Open Source
> Software
> >> for Geospatial".
> >>
> >>
> >> I hope this doesn't hurt anyone, and brings positive point of
> discussion.
> >>
> >> It is just my personal thought as a new board member, and sorry if I've
> >> lost some best practice currently in place.
> >>
> >> Maxi
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Discuss mailing list
> >> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Puneet Kishor
> > Manager, Science and Data Policy
> > Creative Commons
> >
> > ___
> > Discuss mailing list
> > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>



-- 
Puneet Kishor
Manager, Science a

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Polling charter members

[Jachym Cepicky]

Just noting,

discussion about relationship between LocationTech and OSGeo is here
since 2012 (IIRC). That many people did not pain attention to it
(actually including myself up to certain time), is not fault of OSGeo
.. or LocationTech.

It's just actually boring topic. We are community of (mostly)
developers and users of FOSS4G (not conference, but software in this
case). This sounds like politics .. who would pay attention? So, now
we are here, things are happening, we can finally talk to whole
community, because of this IMHO *is* important topic - two big
organisations are trying to find a way, how to cooperate in the future
for better free and open source software for geospatial! This is good.
If for nothing else, then for clarifying OSGeo's position.

Jachym

2014-09-17 22:42 GMT+02:00 P Kishor :
> My guess is, just as I do, most Charter Members find this entire thread very
> alien. For us who don't go to FOSS4G, OSGeo means something completely
> different (here is where I disagree with an earlier email--I think it was Jo
> Cook--that folks know OSGeo products but not OSGeo). To suddenly hear of all
> this chatter about FOSS4G being used as a football between OSGeo and
> LocationTech (an org I heard about for the first time also in this thread)
> is like waking up at night to find a bunch of strangers chatting in your
> living room.
>
> Definitely, involving Charter Members would be a very sound and nice thing
> to do.
>
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Steven Feldman  wrote:
>>
>> Before we get to the stage of polling charter members and local chapters,
>> it would be helpful if more of the charter membership and local chapters
>> chipped in with their opinions. Many seem to have been very quiet, i am sure
>> they must have a view
>> __
>> Steven
>>
>>
>> On 17 Sep 2014, at 20:00, conference-europe-requ...@lists.osgeo.org wrote:
>>
>> From: Massimiliano Cannata 
>> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
>> Date: 17 September 2014 19:22:24 BST
>> To: P Kishor 
>> Cc: OSGeo Discussions 
>>
>>
>> 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 LocationTech. I can really feel
>> the desire to help and foster geospatial open source software from those
>> guys.
>>
>> BTW, I also believe that FOSS4G is the OSGeo event.
>>
>> For this reason I believe that if OSGeo want to change things and share it
>> with LocationTech (not just let them organize it in the name of), we need a
>> deep OSGeo internal discussion at all level: Local Chapters, Charter
>> members, Committees and finally the Board which has the responsibility to
>> vote on this.
>>
>> So, my proposal is:
>> 1) Have a formal proposal from LocationTech which explain terms of
>> collaboration, commitments and guarantees
>> 2) Publish publicly this proposal for a period (let's say 2 week) for
>> people to look into this proposal
>> 3) Call for a vote from charter members
>> 4) Call for a letter of position letter from each committee and local
>> Chapters
>> 5) Publish publicly the results
>> 6) Discuss it on the next board meeting and finally have a vote and a
>> letter of motivation from the Board
>>
>>
>> BTW, the FOSS4G-EUROPE website (http://foss4g-e.org/) states clearly at
>> the home page: "OSGeo's European Conference on Free and Open Source Software
>> for Geospatial".
>>
>>
>> I hope this doesn't hurt anyone, and brings positive point of discussion.
>>
>> It is just my personal thought as a new board member, and sorry if I've
>> lost some best practice currently in place.
>>
>> Maxi
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
>
> --
> Puneet Kishor
> Manager, Science and Data Policy
> Creative Commons
>
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss



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

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Polling charter members

[P Kishor]

My guess is, just as I do, most Charter Members find this entire thread
very alien. For us who don't go to FOSS4G, OSGeo means something completely
different (here is where I disagree with an earlier email—I think it was Jo
Cook—that folks know OSGeo products but not OSGeo). To suddenly hear of all
this chatter about FOSS4G being used as a football between OSGeo and
LocationTech (an org I heard about for the first time also in this thread)
is like waking up at night to find a bunch of strangers chatting in your
living room.

Definitely, involving Charter Members would be a very sound and nice thing
to do.

On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Steven Feldman  wrote:

> Before we get to the stage of polling charter members and local chapters,
> it would be helpful if more of the charter membership and local chapters
> chipped in with their opinions. Many seem to have been very quiet, i am
> sure they must have a view
> __
> Steven
>
>
> On 17 Sep 2014, at 20:00, conference-europe-requ...@lists.osgeo.org wrote:
>
> *From: *Massimiliano Cannata 
> *Subject: **Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo*
> *Date: *17 September 2014 19:22:24 BST
> *To: *P Kishor 
> *Cc: *OSGeo Discussions 
>
>
> 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 LocationTech. I can really feel
> the desire to help and foster geospatial open source software from those
> guys.
>
> BTW, I also believe that FOSS4G is the OSGeo event.
>
> For this reason I believe that if OSGeo want to change things and *share* it
> with LocationTech (not just let them organize it in the name of), we need a
> deep OSGeo internal discussion at all level: Local Chapters, Charter
> members, Committees and finally the Board which has the responsibility to
> vote on this.
>
> So, my proposal is:
> 1) Have a formal proposal from LocationTech which explain terms of
> collaboration, commitments and guarantees
> 2) Publish publicly this proposal for a period (let's say 2 week) for
> people to look into this proposal
> 3) Call for a vote from charter members
> 4) Call for a letter of position letter from each committee and local
> Chapters
> 5) Publish publicly the results
> 6) Discuss it on the next board meeting and finally have a vote and a
> letter of motivation from the Board
>
>
> BTW, the FOSS4G-EUROPE website (http://foss4g-e.org/) states clearly at
> the home page: "OSGeo's European Conference on Free and Open Source
> Software for Geospatial".
>
>
> I hope this doesn't hurt anyone, and brings positive point of discussion.
>
> It is just my personal thought as a new board member, and sorry if I've
> lost some best practice currently in place.
>
> Maxi
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>



-- 
Puneet Kishor
Manager, Science and Data Policy
Creative Commons
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Polling charter members

[Steven Feldman]

Before we get to the stage of polling charter members and local chapters, it 
would be helpful if more of the charter membership and local chapters chipped 
in with their opinions. Many seem to have been very quiet, i am sure they must 
have a view
__
Steven


On 17 Sep 2014, at 20:00, conference-europe-requ...@lists.osgeo.org wrote:

> From: Massimiliano Cannata 
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Hacking OSGeo
> Date: 17 September 2014 19:22:24 BST
> To: P Kishor 
> Cc: OSGeo Discussions 
> 
> 
> 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 LocationTech. I can really feel the 
> desire to help and foster geospatial open source software from those guys.
> 
> BTW, I also believe that FOSS4G is the OSGeo event. 
> 
> For this reason I believe that if OSGeo want to change things and share it 
> with LocationTech (not just let them organize it in the name of), we need a 
> deep OSGeo internal discussion at all level: Local Chapters, Charter members, 
> Committees and finally the Board which has the responsibility to vote on this.
> 
> So, my proposal is:
> 1) Have a formal proposal from LocationTech which explain terms of 
> collaboration, commitments and guarantees
> 2) Publish publicly this proposal for a period (let's say 2 week) for people 
> to look into this proposal
> 3) Call for a vote from charter members
> 4) Call for a letter of position letter from each committee and local Chapters
> 5) Publish publicly the results 
> 6) Discuss it on the next board meeting and finally have a vote and a letter 
> of motivation from the Board
> 
> 
> BTW, the FOSS4G-EUROPE website (http://foss4g-e.org/) states clearly at the 
> home page: "OSGeo's European Conference on Free and Open Source Software for 
> Geospatial".
> 
> 
> I hope this doesn't hurt anyone, and brings positive point of discussion.
> 
> It is just my personal thought as a new board member, and sorry if I've lost 
> some best practice currently in place.
> 
> Maxi
> 
> 

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