Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 03:27:44AM +, Jachym Cepicky wrote: > As you write. GitLab is alternative to new projects, which are condiering > GitHub. And to old projects still using Trac (IMHO) Note that from the README of gitlab community edition you can read: - GitLab Enterprise Edition (EE)

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

Before going to this trouble, we should check if there is an actual demand among projects? Best regards, Bart > On 01 Oct 2015, at 13:17, Jeff McKenna wrote: > > On 2015-10-01 4:18 AM, Jachym Cepicky wrote: >> I'm using gitlab already and it really gives you

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

On 2015-10-01 4:18 AM, Jachym Cepicky wrote: I'm using gitlab already and it really gives you what I like on github Shall we ask the board and SAC for create instance of gitlab on our servers? J I think asking SAC about hosting GitLab on our servers is a great idea! A nice option for

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

On 1 October 2015 at 13:20, Bart van den Eijnden wrote: > Before going to this trouble, we should check if there is an actual demand > among projects? Indeed. Besides, projects which have already adopted GitHub may not be willing to switch again. I actually doubt it. My

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

Given we already have trac, may I suggest to try at just improving it to allow for storing code in a git repository, wherever it is ? I understand there's a plugin to allow for that, did anyone try it ? Speaking about projects demand, here's a list of tickets about trac (many of which being

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

I'm using gitlab already and it really gives you what I like on github Shall we ask the board and SAC for create instance of gitlab on our servers? J st 30. 9. 2015 v 14:31 odesílatel Mateusz Loskot napsal: > On 30 September 2015 at 07:20, Paolo Cavallini

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

As you write. GitLab is alternative to new projects, which are condiering GitHub. And to old projects still using Trac (IMHO) J čt 1. 10. 2015 v 13:37 odesílatel Jeff McKenna < jmcke...@gatewaygeomatics.com> napsal: > I think it would be a great option for new/incubating projects. However > it

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

> I think that the Github move is hazardous. Sure, it is easy, free for > open-source projects, and really really cool. Granted, it helps a lot in > getting fluid contributions to open-source projects. But ... in two years, > they may start shipping sponsors links at the end of the Readme files,

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

> The companies that make money by showing advertising are *content > providers* such as newspapers, TV networks, Q sites,... They have *no > other source of revenue*. > I should clarify that by "TV networks" I mean broadcast networks, not cable companies that make money via subscriptions, and

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

Le 30/09/2015 02:04, Jody Garnett a écrit : Not much of a problem here, since git means each developer has a copy of the whole project. I know we had the same story with SourceForge ... Well, of course source code is safe with the distributed SCM paradigm. And I agree that Github is the

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

There is already an open alternative to GitHub known as GitLab: https://about.gitlab.com Pull your own copy of the software and put it on your own server if you want. Or pay specifically for hosting. Healthy competition, methinks. — Andy On Sep 30, 2015, at 1:20 AM, Paolo Cavallini

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

On 30 September 2015 at 07:20, Paolo Cavallini wrote: > Il 30/09/2015 02:04, Jody Garnett ha scritto: > >> I think that the Github move is hazardous. Sure, it is easy, free >> for open-source projects, and really really cool. Granted, it helps >> a lot in

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

Il 30/09/2015 02:04, Jody Garnett ha scritto: > I think that the Github move is hazardous. Sure, it is easy, free > for open-source projects, and really really cool. Granted, it helps > a lot in getting fluid contributions to open-source projects. But > ... in two years, they may

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

When people ask me how should they start on the GIS world, I always give them two advices: * Check OsGeo. * Read the Libro Libre de SIG Libre[1] (only Spanish, translations accepted) If OsGeo disappeared, someone should invent it. Which doesn't mean it is the only way to achieve the same

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am 26.09.2015 um 17:20 schrieb Darrell Fuhriman: > This is a perfect example. > > All of those are great and wonderful things! The community does great and > wonderful things. That’ s not my point. > > My point is, those activities would happen even

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

Hi all, I am a fairly new charter member, so maybe the two following comments here will be irrelevant. From my perspective, having Orfeo ToolBox as an incubating project definitively helped us to move in the right direction. I am not saying that it would not have occured without OSGeo, but

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

Hi all, Just wanted to give my opinion on using a external service as source code repository, I think there is no problem using github because: - Source Code is protected by the license, - If github service stops to address the project needs then port it to other repository. I remember

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

- A family need a Father, even if children are grown enough to run their lives. - If some problems are there in vehicle, it does not mean that vehicle should be thrown out. When I teach "Why QGIS", one big answer always is "It is an OSGeo product", and it has a meaning. There are thousands of

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 9:17 AM, Julien Michel wrote: > Hi all, > > I am a fairly new charter member, so maybe the two following comments here > will be irrelevant. > > From my perspective, having Orfeo ToolBox as an incubating project > definitively helped us to move in

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

Hi, On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Darrell Fuhriman wrote: > > > All of those are great and wonderful things! The community does great and > wonderful things. That’ s not my point. > > My point is, those activities would happen even if the OSGeo Foundation > disappeared.

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

So far I have enjoyed this thread for the number of ideas it brings forth. Just want to highlight the small difference between a forge (SourceForge, Google Code, Gitourious, GitHub) and Foundation (OSGeo, Apache, Linux, Eclipse). Forges tend to focus software version control, build facilities,

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

+1 On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 7:55 AM, Jody Garnett wrote: > So far I have enjoyed this thread for the number of ideas it brings forth. > > Just want to highlight the small difference between a forge (SourceForge, > Google Code, Gitourious, GitHub) and Foundation (OSGeo,

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 12:12 AM, Milo van der Linden wrote: > Being a "don't talk, act" member since 2008, entrepreneur and former > chairman of a couple of local initiatives, I strongly agree. > > Seeing all the "empty talkers" from my country run for charter membership >

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

Dear Milo, That you agree Darrel's statements is your opinion and fine in any open discussion. I react here on your phrase: '"empty talkers" from my country run for charter membership'. We have 9 Charter Members from the Netherlands, including me. I know each of them, and IMO they are far

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

This is a perfect example. All of those are great and wonderful things! The community does great and wonderful things. That’ s not my point. My point is, those activities would happen even if the OSGeo Foundation disappeared. I’m not questioning whether we have a large and vibrant community,

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

Darrell, you might have some points Let me add, that OSGeo might seem in *some* communities irrelevant, because we, as OSGeo, did not manage to push our brand in the front even on *our* FOSS4G conference (I still remember no OSGeo logo being visible around). OSGeo will be visible only to the

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

Hi All, and especially Darrel, In his email Darrel articulated some ideas that I have been having for a couple of years now, but haven't been able to clearly define. So firstly I'd like to say that I totally agree with Darrel's points (and Michael Gerlek's previously)- OSGeo is definitely in

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

Dear All, I think OSGeo is a body or carrier to carry the spirit of the open source to the world. OSGeo is copper wire to transmit electricity to remote place. Electricity had been there long before the invention of copper wire. We invented copper wire to carry electricity to remote place and

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

Thanks Darrell for such a clear and structured statement. I'd like to add a few thoughts. First I'd like to aggree to the infrastructure thing, in times Open Source projects can get a space (SCM, Ticket system, Build infrastructure, etc) for free everywhere it's kind of wired OSGeo paying for it.

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

To at least have facts straight, GeoServer passed incubation in 2013 http://www.osgeo.org/news/geoserver-graduation Bart Sent from my iPhone > On 26 sep. 2015, at 00:12, Milo van der Linden wrote: > > Being a "don't talk, act" member since 2008, entrepreneur and former

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

Darrell, Thank you for you assessment, I think this is a great call for action and it puts words to a lot of my feelings about OSGeo. If you look at most of the successful projects they are driven by someone with vision and passion that pulls in others to work toward concrete goals. If

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

Being a "don't talk, act" member since 2008, entrepreneur and former chairman of a couple of local initiatives, I strongly agree. Seeing all the "empty talkers" from my country run for charter membership and still not having geoserver, which is the most mature open geospatial product I can think