Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Thematic Mapping Engine as Open Source?
Chris and Dave are right, I'd strongly suggest using a less restrictive license than GPL as you will likely increase your developer base. Dave McIlhagga wrote: On 23-Jun-08, at 11:40 AM, Paolo Cavallini wrote: Bjorn Sandvik ha scritto: I'll consider the pros and cons between different licenses. I don't have commercial interests, but I would like the project to be sustainable. I've changed my mind about using SourceForge, - I agree that Google Code is more suitable. Please note: - GPL is more widely used - many people prefers it, for good reasons (too long to explain here) - Google Code apparently puts severe restrictions on exporting code to several countries. All the best. Similarly there are many good reasons for the long-term sustainability of the project to embrace a more open license such as the BSD which welcomes all participants - even if they have proprietary commercial interest. We avoid GPL like the plague for exactly this reason. Dave ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Cameron Shorter Geospatial Systems Architect Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050 Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254 Think Globally, Fix Locally Commercial Support for Geospatial Open Source Solutions http://www.lisasoft.com/LISAsoft/SupportedProducts.html ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Thematic Mapping Engine as Open Source?
- Lester Caine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Christopher Schmidt wrote: On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 05:40:41PM +0200, Paolo Cavallini wrote: Bjorn Sandvik ha scritto: I'll consider the pros and cons between different licenses. I don't have commercial interests, but I would like the project to be sustainable. I've changed my mind about using SourceForge, - I agree that Google Code is more suitable. Please note: - GPL is more widely used Than what? In any case, GPL is designed to prevent use of the software in a specific set of contexts. I maintain my position that for Javascript Libraries, the GPL is confusing at best, and tends to hurt uptake of an open source project, in my experience. (ExtJS is a strong counter example of a JS library which is GPL licensed -- but they are not an open source project, just open source code.) The GPL is a fine license for many things, I just think that open souce Javascript Libraries isn't among them. GPL is appropriate if you do not want other people to make money out of your effort. LGPL may be more appropriate for Libraries but only after reading http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html Surely you mean people not making money out of selling your efforts without making a contribution back? Plenty of people make money from selling services around GPL software without breaching the licence and I don't think many of those developing GPL software begrudge that. Chris -- Files attached to this email may be in ISO 26300 format (OASIS Open Document Format). If you have difficulty opening them, please visit http://iso26300.info for more information. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Thematic Mapping Engine as Open Source?
Bjorn Sandvik wrote: Thanks for your feedback. I'll consider the pros and cons between different licenses. I don't have commercial interests, but I would like the project to be sustainable. I've changed my mind about using SourceForge, - I agree that Google Code is more suitable. Just as a side note: Google has been overly submissive to US Export Regulations and rejects requests from IPs that can be traced to a location within an country that falls under their export ban list. Unfortunately the same applies to SourceForge. Thus publishing your project through Google Code or SourceForge effectively prevents interested folks from joining the project if they are citizen of a nation that falls under the US Export Regulations. This also applies to people only visiting such countries. Best regards, Arnulf. Regards, Bjørn Christopher Schmidt wrote: On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 12:01:25AM +0100, Bjorn Sandvik wrote: My plan is to release TME as an open source project under a GNU GPL license v3, and use SourceForge as a code repository. Is there a strong reason behind these choices? These days, I probably wouldnt' go with either of them, personally. Looking back, I realize that the GPL license may well be related to the fact that Ext itself is GPL licensed. I wrote the rest of this before I thought of that, but I think it's valuable as a general statement for users thinking of licensing Javascript libraries anyway. It might still make sense, if the restriction is Ext based, the make it clear that your library itself is licensed as $permissive_license, and combining it with Ext makes it GPL licensed: This way, if someone were to buy an Ext commercial license, they could still use it under more permissive terms. If you are a commercial entity looking to make money with open source, the GPL may well be a very good choice. Essentially, you are the only organization that can make improvements to the code that other people can't have -- as the copyright owner, the license doesn't apply to the work you do. (Once you have a project built with lots of poeple's copyright, that does change, but.) However, if your goal is to create a toolset which is widely used, and you are less concerned about maximizing profit from your actions, it seems possible that a less restrictive license might make sense. (An example of a successful GPL licensed project is ExtJS itself.) For example, one of the things that OpenLayers users have commonly requested is the ability to do thematic styling in the way you describe for their data: The coveted SLD editor is a concept that has been tossed around, literally for years. The Ext browser work that you have done would form a perfectly suitable base -- but OpenLayers is BSD licensed, and extensions to it are strongly encouraged to be BSD licensed as well, for reusability. As a result, if the work that you are doing were to be GPL licensed, then I would not feel comfortable encouraging a user to use your code. Part of this problem is actually specific to browsers, imho: the use of the GPL for Javascript software is 'somewhat weird': there are few definitions of where the lines are drawn in Javascript. (The Linux Kernel doesn't 'pollute' complied code that runs on that platform, but where does the line get drawn for Javascript libraries?) I'll admit that my dislike of GPL is strong enough that I have spent much less time investigating it; it's possible these questions are easy to answer, but I don't know. Sourceforge bothers me, to some extent, but I think this might be mostly historical; I tend to prefer Google Code these days (though, see recent thread about Google Code blocking exports as per US Law, which sourceforge may not do). I don't know if there's any real reason to use one over the other; certainly, startup cost with Google Code was low, and you even get a built in wiki. Regards, ___ 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] Thematic Mapping Engine as Open Source?
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 02:01:17PM +0200, Arnulf Christl wrote: Just as a side note: Google has been overly submissive to US Export Regulations and rejects requests from IPs that can be traced to a location within an country that falls under their export ban list. Unfortunately the same applies to SourceForge. Thus publishing your project through Google Code or SourceForge effectively prevents interested folks from joining the project if they are citizen of a nation that falls under the US Export Regulations. This also applies to people only visiting such countries. Is there some other easy option here? Hosting your own is fscking painful, OSGeo doesn't offer hosting for small projects like this, and I expect anyone else who is big enough to make solving this problem easy likely isn't in a position to be much more open/unrestricted, because they're governed by the same laws. It seems to me like an option is just to make the code available on google code, and also republish it in another easily-googled place. Then, if it becomes an issue that is blocking contributors, put the effort into doing something about it -- setting up an SVN mirror, or something similar, to allow those users to contribute. In general, OpenLayers has not seen major contributions from technology export-embargoed countries. (Our server doesn't have technical restrictions blocking export to these countries.) Although it is a concern -- and certainly, it's unfortunate because it is a vicious cycle where contributors are typically blocked, so they don't even bother kind of thing -- I think that the relative importance of this to, say, a website being down an hour a week or something like that is relatively low (and if you're maintaining it yourself, you'll always have downtime when things break). Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt Web Developer ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Thematic Mapping Engine as Open Source?
- Christopher Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 02:01:17PM +0200, Arnulf Christl wrote: Just as a side note: Google has been overly submissive to US Export Regulations and rejects requests from IPs that can be traced to a location within an country that falls under their export ban list. Unfortunately the same applies to SourceForge. Thus publishing your project through Google Code or SourceForge effectively prevents interested folks from joining the project if they are citizen of a nation that falls under the US Export Regulations. This also applies to people only visiting such countries. Is there some other easy option here? Hosting your own is fscking painful, OSGeo doesn't offer hosting for small projects like this, and I expect anyone else who is big enough to make solving this problem easy likely isn't in a position to be much more open/unrestricted, because they're governed by the same laws. Launchpad? Chris -- Files attached to this email may be in ISO 26300 format (OASIS Open Document Format). If you have difficulty opening them, please visit http://iso26300.info for more information. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
RE: [OSGeo-Discuss] Thematic Mapping Engine as Open Source?
A few more hosting options are listed here: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=344490 Gavin -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christopher Schmidt Sent: 24 June 2008 02:22 PM To: OSGeo Discussions Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Thematic Mapping Engine as Open Source? On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 02:01:17PM +0200, Arnulf Christl wrote: Just as a side note: Google has been overly submissive to US Export Regulations and rejects requests from IPs that can be traced to a location within an country that falls under their export ban list. Unfortunately the same applies to SourceForge. Thus publishing your project through Google Code or SourceForge effectively prevents interested folks from joining the project if they are citizen of a nation that falls under the US Export Regulations. This also applies to people only visiting such countries. Is there some other easy option here? Hosting your own is fscking painful, OSGeo doesn't offer hosting for small projects like this, and I expect anyone else who is big enough to make solving this problem easy likely isn't in a position to be much more open/unrestricted, because they're governed by the same laws. It seems to me like an option is just to make the code available on google code, and also republish it in another easily-googled place. Then, if it becomes an issue that is blocking contributors, put the effort into doing something about it -- setting up an SVN mirror, or something similar, to allow those users to contribute. In general, OpenLayers has not seen major contributions from technology export-embargoed countries. (Our server doesn't have technical restrictions blocking export to these countries.) Although it is a concern -- and certainly, it's unfortunate because it is a vicious cycle where contributors are typically blocked, so they don't even bother kind of thing -- I think that the relative importance of this to, say, a website being down an hour a week or something like that is relatively low (and if you're maintaining it yourself, you'll always have downtime when things break). Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt Web Developer ___ 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] Thematic Mapping Engine as Open Source?
2008/6/24 Christopher Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 02:01:17PM +0200, Arnulf Christl wrote: Just as a side note: Google has been overly submissive to US Export Regulations and rejects requests from IPs that can be traced to a location within an country that falls under their export ban list. Unfortunately the same applies to SourceForge. Thus publishing your project through Google Code or SourceForge effectively prevents interested folks from joining the project if they are citizen of a nation that falls under the US Export Regulations. This also applies to people only visiting such countries. Is there some other easy option here? Hosting your own is fscking painful, OSGeo doesn't offer hosting for small projects like this, and I expect anyone else who is big enough to make solving this problem easy likely isn't in a position to be much more open/unrestricted, because they're governed by the same laws. It seems to me like an option is just to make the code available on google code, and also republish it in another easily-googled place. Then, if it becomes an issue that is blocking contributors, put the effort into doing something about it -- setting up an SVN mirror, or something similar, to allow those users to contribute. In general, OpenLayers has not seen major contributions from technology export-embargoed countries. (Our server doesn't have technical restrictions blocking export to these countries.) Although it is a concern -- and certainly, it's unfortunate because it is a vicious cycle where contributors are typically blocked, so they don't even bother kind of thing -- I think that the relative importance of this to, say, a website being down an hour a week or something like that is relatively low (and if you're maintaining it yourself, you'll always have downtime when things break). Regards, I'm right now moving from GoogleCode (the export laws, you know) to JavaHispano[0] with some problems but enough by far for my necessities. There is also gna![1], and SEXTANTE[2] has moved to OSOR[3] a new forge for european public administration free software projects. I tested some time ago the knowledgeforge[4] but it didn't worked really well :S Cheers [0]http://javahispano.net [1]https://gna.org/ [2]http://sextantegis.com/en/index.htm [3]https://forge.osor.eu/projects/sextante/ [4]http://www.knowledgeforge.net/ -- Jorge Gaspar Sanz Salinas Ingeniero en Geodesia y Cartografía http://www.geomaticblog.net http://www.prodevelop.es ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Thematic Mapping Engine as Open Source?
Chris Puttick wrote: - Lester Caine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Christopher Schmidt wrote: On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 05:40:41PM +0200, Paolo Cavallini wrote: Bjorn Sandvik ha scritto: I'll consider the pros and cons between different licenses. I don't have commercial interests, but I would like the project to be sustainable. I've changed my mind about using SourceForge, - I agree that Google Code is more suitable. Please note: - GPL is more widely used Than what? In any case, GPL is designed to prevent use of the software in a specific set of contexts. I maintain my position that for Javascript Libraries, the GPL is confusing at best, and tends to hurt uptake of an open source project, in my experience. (ExtJS is a strong counter example of a JS library which is GPL licensed -- but they are not an open source project, just open source code.) The GPL is a fine license for many things, I just think that open souce Javascript Libraries isn't among them. GPL is appropriate if you do not want other people to make money out of your effort. LGPL may be more appropriate for Libraries but only after reading http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html Surely you mean people not making money out of selling your efforts without making a contribution back? Plenty of people make money from selling services around GPL software without breaching the licence and I don't think many of those developing GPL software begrudge that. No I was referring to instances where commercial companies take source code and data and market it as their own work. There are a few examples where open source data has been 'stolen' legally and the courts have upheld no wrong doing, so some licence with a few teeth is appropriate ;) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Thematic Mapping Engine as Open Source?
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 12:01:25AM +0100, Bjorn Sandvik wrote: My plan is to release TME as an open source project under a GNU GPL license v3, and use SourceForge as a code repository. Is there a strong reason behind these choices? These days, I probably wouldnt' go with either of them, personally. Looking back, I realize that the GPL license may well be related to the fact that Ext itself is GPL licensed. I wrote the rest of this before I thought of that, but I think it's valuable as a general statement for users thinking of licensing Javascript libraries anyway. It might still make sense, if the restriction is Ext based, the make it clear that your library itself is licensed as $permissive_license, and combining it with Ext makes it GPL licensed: This way, if someone were to buy an Ext commercial license, they could still use it under more permissive terms. If you are a commercial entity looking to make money with open source, the GPL may well be a very good choice. Essentially, you are the only organization that can make improvements to the code that other people can't have -- as the copyright owner, the license doesn't apply to the work you do. (Once you have a project built with lots of poeple's copyright, that does change, but.) However, if your goal is to create a toolset which is widely used, and you are less concerned about maximizing profit from your actions, it seems possible that a less restrictive license might make sense. (An example of a successful GPL licensed project is ExtJS itself.) For example, one of the things that OpenLayers users have commonly requested is the ability to do thematic styling in the way you describe for their data: The coveted SLD editor is a concept that has been tossed around, literally for years. The Ext browser work that you have done would form a perfectly suitable base -- but OpenLayers is BSD licensed, and extensions to it are strongly encouraged to be BSD licensed as well, for reusability. As a result, if the work that you are doing were to be GPL licensed, then I would not feel comfortable encouraging a user to use your code. Part of this problem is actually specific to browsers, imho: the use of the GPL for Javascript software is 'somewhat weird': there are few definitions of where the lines are drawn in Javascript. (The Linux Kernel doesn't 'pollute' complied code that runs on that platform, but where does the line get drawn for Javascript libraries?) I'll admit that my dislike of GPL is strong enough that I have spent much less time investigating it; it's possible these questions are easy to answer, but I don't know. Sourceforge bothers me, to some extent, but I think this might be mostly historical; I tend to prefer Google Code these days (though, see recent thread about Google Code blocking exports as per US Law, which sourceforge may not do). I don't know if there's any real reason to use one over the other; certainly, startup cost with Google Code was low, and you even get a built in wiki. Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt Web Developer ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Thematic Mapping Engine as Open Source?
Thanks for your feedback. I'll consider the pros and cons between different licenses. I don't have commercial interests, but I would like the project to be sustainable. I've changed my mind about using SourceForge, - I agree that Google Code is more suitable. Regards, Bjørn Christopher Schmidt wrote: On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 12:01:25AM +0100, Bjorn Sandvik wrote: My plan is to release TME as an open source project under a GNU GPL license v3, and use SourceForge as a code repository. Is there a strong reason behind these choices? These days, I probably wouldnt' go with either of them, personally. Looking back, I realize that the GPL license may well be related to the fact that Ext itself is GPL licensed. I wrote the rest of this before I thought of that, but I think it's valuable as a general statement for users thinking of licensing Javascript libraries anyway. It might still make sense, if the restriction is Ext based, the make it clear that your library itself is licensed as $permissive_license, and combining it with Ext makes it GPL licensed: This way, if someone were to buy an Ext commercial license, they could still use it under more permissive terms. If you are a commercial entity looking to make money with open source, the GPL may well be a very good choice. Essentially, you are the only organization that can make improvements to the code that other people can't have -- as the copyright owner, the license doesn't apply to the work you do. (Once you have a project built with lots of poeple's copyright, that does change, but.) However, if your goal is to create a toolset which is widely used, and you are less concerned about maximizing profit from your actions, it seems possible that a less restrictive license might make sense. (An example of a successful GPL licensed project is ExtJS itself.) For example, one of the things that OpenLayers users have commonly requested is the ability to do thematic styling in the way you describe for their data: The coveted SLD editor is a concept that has been tossed around, literally for years. The Ext browser work that you have done would form a perfectly suitable base -- but OpenLayers is BSD licensed, and extensions to it are strongly encouraged to be BSD licensed as well, for reusability. As a result, if the work that you are doing were to be GPL licensed, then I would not feel comfortable encouraging a user to use your code. Part of this problem is actually specific to browsers, imho: the use of the GPL for Javascript software is 'somewhat weird': there are few definitions of where the lines are drawn in Javascript. (The Linux Kernel doesn't 'pollute' complied code that runs on that platform, but where does the line get drawn for Javascript libraries?) I'll admit that my dislike of GPL is strong enough that I have spent much less time investigating it; it's possible these questions are easy to answer, but I don't know. Sourceforge bothers me, to some extent, but I think this might be mostly historical; I tend to prefer Google Code these days (though, see recent thread about Google Code blocking exports as per US Law, which sourceforge may not do). I don't know if there's any real reason to use one over the other; certainly, startup cost with Google Code was low, and you even get a built in wiki. Regards, ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Thematic Mapping Engine as Open Source?
Bjorn Sandvik ha scritto: I'll consider the pros and cons between different licenses. I don't have commercial interests, but I would like the project to be sustainable. I've changed my mind about using SourceForge, - I agree that Google Code is more suitable. Please note: - GPL is more widely used - many people prefers it, for good reasons (too long to explain here) - Google Code apparently puts severe restrictions on exporting code to several countries. All the best. -- Paolo Cavallini, see: * http://www.faunalia.it/pc * ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Thematic Mapping Engine as Open Source?
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 05:40:41PM +0200, Paolo Cavallini wrote: Bjorn Sandvik ha scritto: I'll consider the pros and cons between different licenses. I don't have commercial interests, but I would like the project to be sustainable. I've changed my mind about using SourceForge, - I agree that Google Code is more suitable. Please note: - GPL is more widely used Than what? In any case, GPL is designed to prevent use of the software in a specific set of contexts. I maintain my position that for Javascript Libraries, the GPL is confusing at best, and tends to hurt uptake of an open source project, in my experience. (ExtJS is a strong counter example of a JS library which is GPL licensed -- but they are not an open source project, just open source code.) The GPL is a fine license for many things, I just think that open souce Javascript Libraries isn't among them. - Google Code apparently puts severe restrictions on exporting code to several countries. Google Code follows the legal restrictions that are placed on it by the government of the country in which the company is based. (I mentioned this in my previous email.) Sourceforge is also a US-based company: it has the same *legal* restrictions placed on it, and I don't know if there is evidence that it doesn't have the same restrictions as Google Code; if they do, I believe that they would be in violation of the law anyway, though admittedly, as with all things, something being against the law doesn't stop people from doing it. Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt Web Developer ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Thematic Mapping Engine as Open Source?
Dave McIlhagga ha scritto: Similarly there are many good reasons for the long-term sustainability of the project to embrace a more open license such as the BSD which welcomes all participants - even if they have proprietary commercial interest. We avoid GPL like the plague for exactly this reason. I knew I was starting a flame... From a game theory perspective, GPL is more widespread, ie evolutionary more successful, because of its hereditary properties. But we're getting OT, probably. pc -- Paolo Cavallini, see: * http://www.faunalia.it/pc * ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Thematic Mapping Engine as Open Source?
On 6/23/08, Christopher Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 05:40:41PM +0200, Paolo Cavallini wrote: Bjorn Sandvik ha scritto: I'll consider the pros and cons between different licenses. I don't have commercial interests, but I would like the project to be sustainable. I've changed my mind about using SourceForge, - I agree that Google Code is more suitable. Please note: - GPL is more widely used Than what? In any case, GPL is designed to prevent use of the software in a specific set of contexts. I maintain my position that for Javascript Libraries, the GPL is confusing at best, and tends to hurt uptake of an open source project, in my experience. (ExtJS is a strong counter example of a JS library which is GPL licensed -- but they are not an open source project, just open source code.) The GPL is a fine license for many things, I just think that open souce Javascript Libraries isn't among them. - Google Code apparently puts severe restrictions on exporting code to several countries. Google Code follows the legal restrictions that are placed on it by the government of the country in which the company is based. (I mentioned this in my previous email.) Sourceforge is also a US-based company: it has the same *legal* restrictions placed on it, and I don't know if there is evidence that it doesn't have the same restrictions as Google Code; if they do, I believe that they would be in violation of the law anyway, though admittedly, as with all things, something being against the law doesn't stop people from doing it. This last point is an important one here -- the license is one thing, the hosting server/country/jurisdiction is another. Bjorn, since you work for the UN or are studying at U of Edinburgh, consider hosting your code somewhere there. Choose whatever license you want, but by hosting it in a different jurisdiction, your code will be subject to different distribution/export restrictions, if any. In other words, don't conflate the license (restrictions placed by you) with the server/host (restrictions placed by the repository). Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt Web Developer ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Puneet Kishor http://punkish.eidesis.org/ Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies http://www.nelson.wisc.edu/ Open Source Geospatial Foundation (OSGeo) http://www.osgeo.org/ ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
