Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Awesome OSGeo Vision and Analysis from Marc Vloemans!

[Helena Mitasova]

Marc,

you can find the founding info on the OSGeo website.
http://www.osgeo.org/content/foundation//meetings/2006_02_04/meeting.html

specifically here is the list of founders and the projects
http://www.osgeo.org/content/foundation//meetings/2006_02_04/participants.html

the founding projects are also listed at the end of the notes here
http://www.osgeo.org/content/foundation//meetings/2006_02_04/BreakoutTakeaways.html

As you may notice, Autodesk actually played quite important role.

Thank you for the inspiring vision for the marketing committee and OSGeo in
general,

Helena



On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Marc Vloemans 
wrote:

> Hi Maxi
>
> I have not been at the actual birthing myself ;-)
> As far as I could retrieve from the archives the MapServer community
> appeared to have been the basis, as its Bylaws were legally
> transferred/adopted. Perhaps someone else knows more?
>
> More importantly it illustrates that ; the mental model/ideas of how to
> organise and run an umbrella organisation like OSGeo is a carbon copy of
> how a single project community operates (voting, chapter members in stead
> of committees, infrastructure like IRC/wiki). For inspiration I draw from;
> the Apache Foundation is somewhat differently organised from its individual
> projects (in terms of governance, structure, expertises, processes,
> infrastructure and the like).
>
> From a former life (Architecture/City planning); 'form follows function'.
> A bus station (usually) does not resemble a single bus.
>
> Looking forward to your suggestions/ideas on the matter.
>
> Vriendelijke groet,
> Marc Vloemans
>
>
> Op 15 apr. 2016 om 13:45 heeft Massimiliano Cannata <
> massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch> het volgende geschreven:
>
> Thanks Mark for sharing your personal vision, as multi-decade experienced
> person.
> I believe that your points are helpful to inspire further discussion.
>
> The only remark I wish to mention is that OSGeo is a community that has
> always been an umbrella for projects (it never evolved to, but it born from
> several communities as it is).
>
> Maxi
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2016-04-15 12:28 GMT+02:00 Cameron Shorter :
>
>> Mark has started an excellent SWOT analysis of OSGeo, laying a foundation
>> for a practical, implementable vision for OSGeo. I suggest everyone grad a
>> coffee and take the time to read and then comment:
>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Talk:Marketing_Committee
>>
>> Mark, thank you for the deep thought you have obviously put into this.
>> I'm excited to hear feedback from others, and ideas on how to refine your
>> ideas and put them into practice.
>>
>> Warm regards, Cameron
>>
>> On 15/04/2016 2:04 am, Marc VLOEMANS wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Thanks for the invite and effort preparing it. I will certainly try to
>> fill it out to my best of abilities. But I feel it lacks an objective frame
>> work to sift, group, choose, prioritise and execute the results of the
>> questionnaire.
>> The present leap from vision/mission to objectives is often a bit too big
>> for me (I miss a storyline); explicit transparent strategy formulation
>> should make the questionaire easier :-).
>>
>> Unfortunately there are too many implicit assumptions when it comes to
>> our intended strategy. We already do many things (events, projects,
>> products, partnering, other initiatives) for many stakeholders. But which
>> add more value to these than others (having a volunteer does not make
>> something worthwhile doing)? What do stakeholders expect from OSGeo (did we
>> ever ask)? Which initiatives are more instrumental to fullfil our mission
>> than others (not necessarily the number of mentions in the
>> questionaire...)? Which initoatives deserve more attention than others (eg
>> those fullfilling more objectives at the same time)? If none of us is
>> interested in executing a certain activity/task, it does not mean that this
>> activity is not crucial to our existence.
>>
>> I have done some quick thinking and writing on how general strategic
>> principles would apply to OSGeo, where the Board's objectives fit in and
>> what possible avenues we have to meet them. So I share this with the list
>> via this link: 
>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Talk:Marketing_Committee
>> For those who take the time to read, hopefully my thought process can
>> help with filling in the questionaire and deciding what we are going to do
>> and monitoring the results!
>>
>> (For those who do not know me; I have a multi-decade track record in
>> strategy, business development and marketing with most types of
>> organzations. Good software has an architecture, good strategy does too ;-)
>>
>> Please, do not consider this as a critique or an alternative to
>> vision/mission/objectives and related questionaire, but rather as a means
>> to fill essential gaps. Ones to fill in order to optimise our added value
>> as an 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] 2016 OSGeo's actions - Survey

[Dirk Frigne]

Marc,

Thank you for writing down your thoughts, I will re-read them during the
weekend and comment on them. It is a great starting point to forward
with OSGeo as a volunteer based organisation.

As an outreach opportunity, I would like to invite at least one of all
the OSGeo advocates from the projects forming the backbone of open
spatial[1]  IT to come and present on the Geospatial World Forum in
Rotterdam [2].

This fits exactly in the todo's you're mentioning:
• Promote specific OSGeo services/products for specific target
stakeholders. [3]

Although in the past we experienced a less interesting experience, I
think it is an important event, not as a sort of FOSS4G event, but to
outreach to the broader GIS community, who don't know open source yet,
and the way we, as a community,  are working.

There are also 2 important workshops:
Preparing the local European Chapter, with the target to announce it in
Bonn. We still need to finish the discussion if the European Local
Chapter should be a sort of meta-chapter or just an other chapter
promoting OSGeo advocacy on a European level.

And there is a workshop about INSPIRE and OSGeo - how to collaborate
better. Robin Smidt will present an initiative to promote INSPIRE
related tasks to find their solutions in the OSGeo Projects communities.
We will have the opportunity to promote OSGeo projects to stakeholders
of the INSPIRE infrastructure.

So I want to call for volunteers to preach to the unconvinced and let
them see how a group of individuals can impact the open spatial society.

have a nice weekend!

Dirk

[1] This is how Marc describes some of the OSGeo projects under
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Talk:Marketing_Committee - "OSGeo strengths"
of the SWOT.
[2] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Geospatial_World_Forum_2016
[3] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Talk:Marketing_Committee - strategic
option / To-do




On 14-04-16 18:04, Marc VLOEMANS wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> Thanks for the invite and effort preparing it. I will certainly try to
> fill it out to my best of abilities. But I feel it lacks an objective
> frame work to sift, group, choose, prioritise and execute the results of
> the questionnaire.
> The present leap from vision/mission to objectives is often a bit too
> big for me (I miss a storyline); explicit transparent strategy
> formulation should make the questionaire easier :-).
> 
> Unfortunately there are too many implicit assumptions when it comes to
> our intended strategy. We already do many things (events, projects,
> products, partnering, other initiatives) for many stakeholders. But
> which add more value to these than others (having a volunteer does not
> make something worthwhile doing)? What do stakeholders expect from OSGeo
> (did we ever ask)? Which initiatives are more instrumental to fullfil
> our mission than others (not necessarily the number of mentions in the
> questionaire...)? Which initoatives deserve more attention than others
> (eg those fullfilling more objectives at the same time)? If none of us
> is interested in executing a certain activity/task, it does not mean
> that this activity is not crucial to our existence.
> 
> I have done some quick thinking and writing on how general strategic
> principles would apply to OSGeo, where the Board's objectives fit in and
> what possible avenues we have to meet them. So I share this with the
> list via this link: https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Talk:Marketing_Committee
> For those who take the time to read, hopefully my thought process can
> help with filling in the questionaire and deciding what we are going to
> do and monitoring the results!
> 
> (For those who do not know me; I have a multi-decade track record in
> strategy, business development and marketing with most types of
> organzations. Good software has an architecture, good strategy does too ;-)
> 
> Please, do not consider this as a critique or an alternative to
> vision/mission/objectives and related questionaire, but rather as a
> means to fill essential gaps. Ones to fill in order to optimise our
> added value as an organisation.
> 
> Happy reading.
> Cheers, Marc Vloemans
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Marc Vloemans
> 
> Mobile +31(0)651 844262
> LinkedIn: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/marcvloemans
> http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans
> 
> 
> 2016-04-12 18:41 GMT+02:00 Massimiliano Cannata
> >:
> 
> Dear OSGeo Community member,
> during the Face to Face board meeting held in February in Eide
> (Holland) a new 2026 OSGeo strategy has been formulated. We are now
> in a phase of community engagement to define the tactics to be
> implemented in the 2016 so that we can advance toward our goals.
> 
> For this reason, the board kindly ask you to participate in the
> survey by filling (as many time as your ideas are) the form at this
> url: http://goo.gl/forms/HTGTlKv7SB [1]
> 
> Details on 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] What would you want from an OSGeo Git Service ?

[Mateusz Loskot]

On 15 April 2016 at 14:51, Sandro Santilli  wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 02:21:22PM +0200, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
>
>> Finally, GitHub, wins: feature-wise, marketing-wise, with 'zero' maintenance
>> - most, if not all, of our projects already prefer GitHub.
>
> 1. marketing wasn't in your 10 points ?

No, this refers to Jody's point(s).

> 2. 'zero' maintainance is true for any hosted solution (including
>gitlab.com, for example).

Just that being officially on GitLab does not equal being officially on GitHub.
Again, relates to the marketing point.
I also think that one of the major reasons OSGeo teams began move to GitHub
is because they "want to be where the developers [currently] are".

>> The only reason we haven't done it already is the cost.
>
> Done what ?

Moved to GitHub.

> Most projects don't need private repositories so could
> move at no cost. Or you mean the cost of having LDAP authentication ?

I mean non-technical reasons as that is what drives the move.

>> Let's allocate budget for paid account.
>
> Are you willing to collect quotes for hosted git service plans
> meeting all of your 10 features above ?


No and no need for any research.
There is just one player worth to consider, GitHub,
and the price is known (e.g. $200/month).

> Personally I wouldn't like to see an "open source" foundation pay for
> services based on "closed source" software

Personally, as long as policy and statements the foundation and its members
make are clear and consistent, I don't care.

> but I guess there are open
> source based companies offering hosted services too.

It does not matter.
Assuming dropping self-hosted solution is an option,
and looking at the current portfolio of OSGeo projects which
moved to and actively rely on this GitHub,
GitHub is only sensible place to move to.


>> However, the very first question is still open:
>> Do we want or need to switch at all?
>> Are all teams happy with the OSGeo SVN+Trac setup?
>
> I guess this needs to be an individual question, not a per-team one.

There needs to be team-based agreement.


Best regards,
-- 
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Awesome OSGeo Vision and Analysis from Marc Vloemans!

[Marc Vloemans]

Hi Maxi

I have not been at the actual birthing myself ;-)
As far as I could retrieve from the archives the MapServer community appeared 
to have been the basis, as its Bylaws were legally transferred/adopted. Perhaps 
someone else knows more?

More importantly it illustrates that ; the mental model/ideas of how to 
organise and run an umbrella organisation like OSGeo is a carbon copy of how a 
single project community operates (voting, chapter members in stead of 
committees, infrastructure like IRC/wiki). For inspiration I draw from; the 
Apache Foundation is somewhat differently organised from its individual 
projects (in terms of governance, structure, expertises, processes, 
infrastructure and the like).

From a former life (Architecture/City planning); 'form follows function'. A bus 
station (usually) does not resemble a single bus.

Looking forward to your suggestions/ideas on the matter. 

Vriendelijke groet,
Marc Vloemans


> Op 15 apr. 2016 om 13:45 heeft Massimiliano Cannata 
>  het volgende geschreven:
> 
> Thanks Mark for sharing your personal vision, as multi-decade experienced 
> person. 
> I believe that your points are helpful to inspire further discussion.
> 
> The only remark I wish to mention is that OSGeo is a community that has 
> always been an umbrella for projects (it never evolved to, but it born from 
> several communities as it is).
> 
> Maxi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2016-04-15 12:28 GMT+02:00 Cameron Shorter :
>> Mark has started an excellent SWOT analysis of OSGeo, laying a foundation 
>> for a practical, implementable vision for OSGeo. I suggest everyone grad a 
>> coffee and take the time to read and then comment:
>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Talk:Marketing_Committee
>> 
>> Mark, thank you for the deep thought you have obviously put into this. I'm 
>> excited to hear feedback from others, and ideas on how to refine your ideas 
>> and put them into practice.
>> 
>> Warm regards, Cameron
>> 
>>> On 15/04/2016 2:04 am, Marc VLOEMANS   wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>> 
>>> Thanks for the invite and effort preparing it. I will certainly try to fill 
>>> it out to my best of abilities. But I feel it lacks an objective frame work 
>>> to sift, group, choose, prioritise and execute the results of the 
>>> questionnaire.
>>> The present leap from vision/mission to objectives is often a bit too big 
>>> for me (I miss a storyline); explicit transparent strategy formulation 
>>> should make the questionaire easier :-).
>>> 
>>> Unfortunately there are too many implicit assumptions when it comes to our 
>>> intended strategy. We already do many things (events, projects, products, 
>>> partnering, other initiatives) for many stakeholders. But which add more 
>>> value to these than others (having a volunteer does not make something 
>>> worthwhile doing)? What do stakeholders expect from OSGeo (did we ever 
>>> ask)? Which initiatives are more instrumental to fullfil our mission than 
>>> others (not necessarily the number of mentions in the questionaire...)? 
>>> Which initoatives deserve more attention than others (eg those fullfilling 
>>> more objectives at the same time)? If none of us is interested in executing 
>>> a certain activity/task, it does not mean that this activity is not crucial 
>>> to our existence.
>>> 
>>> I have done some quick thinking and writing on how general strategic 
>>> principles would apply to OSGeo, where the Board's objectives fit in and 
>>> what possible avenues we have to meet them. So I share this with the list 
>>> via this link: https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Talk:Marketing_Committee
>>> For those who take the time to read, hopefully my thought process can help 
>>> with filling in the questionaire and deciding what we are going to do and 
>>> monitoring the results!
>>> 
>>> (For those who do not know me; I have a multi-decade track record in 
>>> strategy, business development and marketing with   most types of 
>>> organzations. Good software has an architecture, good strategy does too ;-)
>>> 
>>> Please, do not consider this as a critique or an alternative to 
>>> vision/mission/objectives and related questionaire, but rather as a means 
>>> to fill essential gaps. Ones to fill in order to optimise our added value 
>>> as an organisation.
>>> 
>>> Happy reading.
>>> Cheers, Marc Vloemans
>>> 
>>> Kind regards,
>>> 
>>> Marc Vloemans
>>> 
>>> Mobile +31(0)651 844262
>>> LinkedIn: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans
>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/marcvloemans
>>> http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2016-04-12 18:41 GMT+02:00 Massimiliano Cannata 
>>> :
 Dear OSGeo Community member,
 during the Face to Face board meeting held in February in Eide (Holland) a 
 new 2026 OSGeo strategy has been formulated. We are now in a phase of 
 community engagement to define the tactics to be implemented in the 2016 
 so that we 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] What would you want from an OSGeo Git Service ?

[Sandro Santilli]

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 02:21:22PM +0200, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
> On 15 April 2016 at 09:52, Sandro Santilli  wrote:
> > What would you want from an OSGeo Git Service ?
> 
> My 10 features are:
> 
> 1. LDAP (log in with OSGeo User ID or OpenID)
> 2. Private repositories
> 3. Organizations (e.g./GDAL)
> 4. User space (fork /GDAL/gdal into /mloskot/gdal, also private fork)
> 5. Issue tracker (internal, as external would never be as well integrated)
> -- Milestones, labels/categories, commit keywords (e.g. Fixes #123)
> -- Comment issues via mail is not critical, but nice.
> 6. Wiki (internal, see above)
> 7. Code review (comments on diff lines is a minimum)
> 8. Pull requests
> 9. CI (integration with Travis CI and AppVeyor is a minimum)
> 10. Webhooks and any other mean to integrate with IRC, Gitter, Slack,
> whatever teams like to use.
> 
> The comparison table [1] so far, I think, makes it clear GitLab is the only
> self-hosted solution which is close to what we've got now: Subversion + Trac.
> It also matches my 10 points.
> 
> Gogs wins due to low*** maintenance requirements,
> but it will require custom development what, I think,
> is a deal breaker - we have NO resources for this.
> 
> GitLab wins feature-wise, but its maintenance might turn
> very demanding***. If bigger hassle than SVN+Trac this
> also might be deal breaker - we have VERY limited resources.
> 
> ***We need to allocate budget for admins!

I would add that IFF all projects migrate to a new infrastructure
(like Gogs or GitLab) the overall maintainance cost might _reduce_
as enabling a feature (like "tickets update via commit log")
currently requires changing the configuration of each project
repository, rather than a single configuration valid for
everybody (or an autonomous setting for it).

> Finally, GitHub, wins: feature-wise, marketing-wise, with 'zero' maintenance
> - most, if not all, of our projects already prefer GitHub.

1. marketing wasn't in your 10 points ?
2. 'zero' maintainance is true for any hosted solution (including
   gitlab.com, for example).

> The only reason we haven't done it already is the cost.

Done what ? Most projects don't need private repositories so could
move at no cost. Or you mean the cost of having LDAP authentication ?

> Let's allocate budget for paid account.

Are you willing to collect quotes for hosted git service plans
meeting all of your 10 features above ? Do we have an idea about
the actual needs in term of number of repositories or other similar
parameters required ?

Personally I wouldn't like to see an "open source" foundation pay for
services based on "closed source" software, but I guess there are open
source based companies offering hosted services too.

> However, the very first question is still open:
> Do we want or need to switch at all?
> Are all teams happy with the OSGeo SVN+Trac setup?

I guess this needs to be an individual question, not a per-team one.
Personally I'd like to stop using SVN, in general, and being able
to easily publish my development branches for consideration by
projects (and discussion over them). Current trac setup allows to
switch to git but management of forks and pull requests are not
available out-of-the-box (didn't do any research about plugins
to do that). Add to that the problem of needing to enable each feature
on each of the projects and find that it migth be just easier
to switch all to Gogs (28 repositories are already registered there,
and it is only an experimental deploy).

Looking forward for others to answer this fundamental question:
Are you happy with OSGeo SVN+Trac setup ?

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

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] What would you want from an OSGeo Git Service ?

[Mateusz Loskot]

On 15 April 2016 at 09:52, Sandro Santilli  wrote:
> What would you want from an OSGeo Git Service ?

My 10 features are:

1. LDAP (log in with OSGeo User ID or OpenID)
2. Private repositories
3. Organizations (e.g./GDAL)
4. User space (fork /GDAL/gdal into /mloskot/gdal, also private fork)
5. Issue tracker (internal, as external would never be as well integrated)
-- Milestones, labels/categories, commit keywords (e.g. Fixes #123)
-- Comment issues via mail is not critical, but nice.
6. Wiki (internal, see above)
7. Code review (comments on diff lines is a minimum)
8. Pull requests
9. CI (integration with Travis CI and AppVeyor is a minimum)
10. Webhooks and any other mean to integrate with IRC, Gitter, Slack,
whatever teams like to use.

The comparison table [1] so far, I think, makes it clear GitLab is the only
self-hosted solution which is close to what we've got now: Subversion + Trac.
It also matches my 10 points.

Gogs wins due to low*** maintenance requirements,
but it will require custom development what, I think,
is a deal breaker - we have NO resources for this.

GitLab wins feature-wise, but its maintenance might turn
very demanding***. If bigger hassle than SVN+Trac this
also might be deal breaker - we have VERY limited resources.

***We need to allocate budget for admins!



Finally, GitHub, wins: feature-wise, marketing-wise, with 'zero' maintenance
- most, if not all, of our projects already prefer GitHub.
The only reason we haven't done it already is the cost.
Let's allocate budget for paid account.
Let's negotiate with GitHub a discount, we are not 501(c)(3), but we
are 501(c)(4).


However, the very first question is still open:
Do we want or need to switch at all?
Are all teams happy with the OSGeo SVN+Trac setup?

[1]https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GitInfrastructureComparison

Best regards,
-- 
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Awesome OSGeo Vision and Analysis from Marc Vloemans!

[Massimiliano Cannata]

Thanks Mark for sharing your personal vision, as multi-decade experienced
person.
I believe that your points are helpful to inspire further discussion.

The only remark I wish to mention is that OSGeo is a community that has
always been an umbrella for projects (it never evolved to, but it born from
several communities as it is).

Maxi






2016-04-15 12:28 GMT+02:00 Cameron Shorter :

> Mark has started an excellent SWOT analysis of OSGeo, laying a foundation
> for a practical, implementable vision for OSGeo. I suggest everyone grad a
> coffee and take the time to read and then comment:
> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Talk:Marketing_Committee
>
> Mark, thank you for the deep thought you have obviously put into this. I'm
> excited to hear feedback from others, and ideas on how to refine your ideas
> and put them into practice.
>
> Warm regards, Cameron
>
> On 15/04/2016 2:04 am, Marc VLOEMANS wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> Thanks for the invite and effort preparing it. I will certainly try to
> fill it out to my best of abilities. But I feel it lacks an objective frame
> work to sift, group, choose, prioritise and execute the results of the
> questionnaire.
> The present leap from vision/mission to objectives is often a bit too big
> for me (I miss a storyline); explicit transparent strategy formulation
> should make the questionaire easier :-).
>
> Unfortunately there are too many implicit assumptions when it comes to our
> intended strategy. We already do many things (events, projects, products,
> partnering, other initiatives) for many stakeholders. But which add more
> value to these than others (having a volunteer does not make something
> worthwhile doing)? What do stakeholders expect from OSGeo (did we ever
> ask)? Which initiatives are more instrumental to fullfil our mission than
> others (not necessarily the number of mentions in the questionaire...)?
> Which initoatives deserve more attention than others (eg those fullfilling
> more objectives at the same time)? If none of us is interested in executing
> a certain activity/task, it does not mean that this activity is not crucial
> to our existence.
>
> I have done some quick thinking and writing on how general strategic
> principles would apply to OSGeo, where the Board's objectives fit in and
> what possible avenues we have to meet them. So I share this with the list
> via this link: 
> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Talk:Marketing_Committee
> For those who take the time to read, hopefully my thought process can help
> with filling in the questionaire and deciding what we are going to do and
> monitoring the results!
>
> (For those who do not know me; I have a multi-decade track record in
> strategy, business development and marketing with most types of
> organzations. Good software has an architecture, good strategy does too ;-)
>
> Please, do not consider this as a critique or an alternative to
> vision/mission/objectives and related questionaire, but rather as a means
> to fill essential gaps. Ones to fill in order to optimise our added value
> as an organisation.
>
> Happy reading.
> Cheers, Marc Vloemans
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Marc Vloemans
>
> Mobile +31(0)651 844262
> LinkedIn: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/marcvloemans
> http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans
>
>
> 2016-04-12 18:41 GMT+02:00 Massimiliano Cannata <
> massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch>:
>
>> Dear OSGeo Community member,
>> during the Face to Face board meeting held in February in Eide (Holland)
>> a new 2026 OSGeo strategy has been formulated. We are now in a phase of
>> community engagement to define the tactics to be implemented in the 2016 so
>> that we can advance toward our goals.
>>
>> For this reason, the board kindly ask you to participate in the survey by
>> filling (as many time as your ideas are) the form at this url:
>> http://goo.gl/forms/HTGTlKv7SB [1]
>>
>> Details on the process and on the strategy are available at
>> http://www.slideshare.net/cannata/osgeo-2026-strategy [2] and are
>> described in the preamble of the survey.
>>
>>
>> In the name of the Board of Directors,
>> Thanks and Best regards,
>> Maxi
>>
>>
>> [1] http://goo.gl/forms/HTGTlKv7SB
>>
>> [2]  http://www.slideshare.net/cannata/osgeo-2026-strategy
>>
>> --
>> *Massimiliano Cannata*
>>
>> Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica
>>
>> Responsabile settore Geomatica
>>
>>
>> Istituto scienze della Terra
>>
>> Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design
>>
>> Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana
>>
>> Campus Trevano, CH - 6952 Canobbio
>>
>> Tel. +41 (0)58 666 62 14 <%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2014>
>>
>> Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09 <%2B41%20%280%2958%20666%2062%2009>
>>
>> massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch
>>
>> *www.supsi.ch/ist *
>>
>> 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Come in, we're open! - FOSS4G-2016 registration starts today

[Gert-Jan van der Weijden - Stichting OSGeo.nl]

As some of you already noted the message contains an invalid link. 

Of course it should point to http://2016.foss4g.org

 

 

regards,

 

Gert-Jan

 

Van: Gert-Jan van der Weijden - Stichting OSGeo.nl
[mailto:gert-...@osgeo.nl] 
Verzonden: vrijdag 15 april 2016 12:05
Aan: 'OSGeo Discussions'
Onderwerp: Come in, we're open! - FOSS4G-2016 registration starts today

 

Come in, we're open! 

FOSS4G-2016 registration starts today

After several months of preparations, today is the day we happily open the
doors of FOSS4G 2016 Bonn, Germany! From the 24th to the 26th of August
hundreds (perhaps even one thousand!) users, developers, policy makers,
academics from all over the world will gather in the city of Bonn to grasp
the state of the art of free and open source geospatial software, to be
inspired by open source software study cases and data solutions that solve
real life problems and, of course, to rejoin old friends and make new ones. 

Besides the key notes, the topic talks and the 180 presentations clustered
into the core conference you can extend your own program by joining one or
more of the 40 workshops [http://foss4g2016.org/programme.html#workshops],
or by contributing your pieces of code or documentation to one or more of
the open source geospatial projects
[http://foss4g2016.org/programme.html#code-sprints]

Following the long working days of the conference, there is a a fine set of
social events prepared for you to make sure your visit to the 2016 edition
of the FOSS4G conference will be an unforgettable experience.

Today is the day that registration starts. Early registration doesn't just
mean you have secured your place at this remarkable event, it also helps us
giving the conference its final shape. Therefore, if you register before 8th
of May, we award you with a 160 euro discount. Maybe more importantly
though, we have prepared a surprise for our early birds. You have the
opportunity to win one of the 50 unique FOSS4G 2016 T-shirts! Will you be
one of the lucky ones? 

Find all the details at   http://2016.foss4.org or
point your browser straight to the registration form at
http://2016.foss4g.org/attending.html#registration

 

On behalf of the entire FOSS4G Local Organizing Committee, 

Gert-Jan

 

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

[OSGeo-Discuss] Awesome OSGeo Vision and Analysis from Marc Vloemans!

[Cameron Shorter]

Mark has started an excellent SWOT analysis of OSGeo, laying a 
foundation for a practical, implementable vision for OSGeo. I suggest 
everyone grad a coffee and take the time to read and then comment:

https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Talk:Marketing_Committee

Mark, thank you for the deep thought you have obviously put into this. 
I'm excited to hear feedback from others, and ideas on how to refine 
your ideas and put them into practice.


Warm regards, Cameron

On 15/04/2016 2:04 am, Marc VLOEMANS wrote:

Dear all,

Thanks for the invite and effort preparing it. I will certainly try to 
fill it out to my best of abilities. But I feel it lacks an objective 
frame work to sift, group, choose, prioritise and execute the results 
of the questionnaire.
The present leap from vision/mission to objectives is often a bit too 
big for me (I miss a storyline); explicit transparent strategy 
formulation should make the questionaire easier :-).


Unfortunately there are too many implicit assumptions when it comes to 
our intended strategy. We already do many things (events, projects, 
products, partnering, other initiatives) for many stakeholders. But 
which add more value to these than others (having a volunteer does not 
make something worthwhile doing)? What do stakeholders expect from 
OSGeo (did we ever ask)? Which initiatives are more instrumental to 
fullfil our mission than others (not necessarily the number of 
mentions in the questionaire...)? Which initoatives deserve more 
attention than others (eg those fullfilling more objectives at the 
same time)? If none of us is interested in executing a certain 
activity/task, it does not mean that this activity is not crucial to 
our existence.


I have done some quick thinking and writing on how general strategic 
principles would apply to OSGeo, where the Board's objectives fit in 
and what possible avenues we have to meet them. So I share this with 
the list via this link: 
https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Talk:Marketing_Committee
For those who take the time to read, hopefully my thought process can 
help with filling in the questionaire and deciding what we are going 
to do and monitoring the results!


(For those who do not know me; I have a multi-decade track record in 
strategy, business development and marketing with most types of 
organzations. Good software has an architecture, good strategy does 
too ;-)


Please, do not consider this as a critique or an alternative to 
vision/mission/objectives and related questionaire, but rather as a 
means to fill essential gaps. Ones to fill in order to optimise our 
added value as an organisation.


Happy reading.
Cheers, Marc Vloemans

Kind regards,

Marc Vloemans

Mobile +31(0)651 844262
LinkedIn: http://nl.linkedin.com/in/marcvloemans
Twitter: http://twitter.com/marcvloemans
http://www.slideshare.net/marcvloemans


2016-04-12 18:41 GMT+02:00 Massimiliano Cannata 
>:


Dear OSGeo Community member,
during the Face to Face board meeting held in February in Eide
(Holland) a new 2026 OSGeo strategy has been formulated. We are
now in a phase of community engagement to define the tactics to be
implemented in the 2016 so that we can advance toward our goals.

For this reason, the board kindly ask you to participate in the
survey by filling (as many time as your ideas are) the form at
this url: http://goo.gl/forms/HTGTlKv7SB [1]

Details on the process and on the strategy are available at
http://www.slideshare.net/cannata/osgeo-2026-strategy [2] and are
described in the preamble of the survey.


In the name of the Board of Directors,
Thanks and Best regards,
Maxi


[1] http://goo.gl/forms/HTGTlKv7SB

[2] http://www.slideshare.net/cannata/osgeo-2026-strategy

-- 
*Massimiliano Cannata*


Professore SUPSI in ingegneria Geomatica

Responsabile settore Geomatica


Istituto scienze della Terra

Dipartimento ambiente costruzione e design

Scuola universitaria professionale della Svizzera italiana

Campus Trevano, CH - 6952 Canobbio

Tel. +41 (0)58 666 62 14 

Fax +41 (0)58 666 62 09 

massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch 

_www.supsi.ch/ist _


___
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


--
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
LISAsoft
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099

___
Discuss 

[OSGeo-Discuss] Come in, we're open! - FOSS4G-2016 registration starts today

[Gert-Jan van der Weijden - Stichting OSGeo.nl]

Come in, we're open! 

FOSS4G-2016 registration starts today

After several months of preparations, today is the day we happily open the
doors of FOSS4G 2016 Bonn, Germany! From the 24th to the 26th of August
hundreds (perhaps even one thousand!) users, developers, policy makers,
academics from all over the world will gather in the city of Bonn to grasp
the state of the art of free and open source geospatial software, to be
inspired by open source software study cases and data solutions that solve
real life problems and, of course, to rejoin old friends and make new ones. 

Besides the key notes, the topic talks and the 180 presentations clustered
into the core conference you can extend your own program by joining one or
more of the 40 workshops [http://foss4g2016.org/programme.html#workshops],
or by contributing your pieces of code or documentation to one or more of
the open source geospatial projects
[http://foss4g2016.org/programme.html#code-sprints]

Following the long working days of the conference, there is a a fine set of
social events prepared for you to make sure your visit to the 2016 edition
of the FOSS4G conference will be an unforgettable experience.

Today is the day that registration starts. Early registration doesn't just
mean you have secured your place at this remarkable event, it also helps us
giving the conference its final shape. Therefore, if you register before 8th
of May, we award you with a 160 euro discount. Maybe more importantly
though, we have prepared a surprise for our early birds. You have the
opportunity to win one of the 50 unique FOSS4G 2016 T-shirts! Will you be
one of the lucky ones? 

Find all the details at   http://2016.foss4.org or
point your browser straight to the registration form at
http://2016.foss4g.org/attending.html#registration

 

On behalf of the entire FOSS4G Local Organizing Committee, 

Gert-Jan

 

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

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] PostgreSQL

[Jorge Sanz]

All materials from Geotalleres are CC-BY-SA unless stated differently,
feel free to use them as you wish, a couple more resources about that
project:

- Website: http://geotalleres.github.io/geotalleres/
- Mailing list: https://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geotalleres-dev

Cheers

On 14 April 2016 at 10:16, Luigi Pirelli  wrote:
> Hi Maria
>
> the Geoinquieto contellation have a good set of training material in spanish:
>
> https://github.com/geotalleres/geotalleres
>
> There is no license specification. would be asked.
>
> cheers
>
>
> Luigi Pirelli
>
> **
> * Boundless QGIS Support/Development: lpirelli AT boundlessgeo DOT com
> * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/luigipirelli
> * Stackexchange: http://gis.stackexchange.com/users/19667/luigi-pirelli
> * GitHub: https://github.com/luipir
> * Mastering QGIS:
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/mastering-qgis
> **
>
>
> On 13 April 2016 at 20:54, Maria Brovelli  wrote:
>> Dear All
>> is there nobody who has a course about PostreSQL to be put in the list of UN
>> training material (http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/UNTraining) ? Is there nobody
>> who has suggestions about where to find an excellent course?
>> Thanks!
>> Best regards!
>> Maria
>>
>> --
>>
>> Prof. Maria Antonia Brovelli
>> Vice Rector for Como Campus and GIS Professor
>> Politecnico di Milano
>>
>> ISPRS WG IV/5 "Web and Cloud Based Geospatial Services and Applications";
>> OSGeo; ICA-OSGeo-ISPRS AB; NASA WorldWind Europa Challenge; SIFET
>> Sol Katz Award 2015
>>  Via Natta, 12/14 - 22100 COMO (ITALY)
>> Tel. +39-031-3327336 - Mob. +39-328-0023867 - fax. +39-031-3327321
>> e-mail1: maria.brove...@polimi.it
>> e-mail2: prorettr...@como.polimi.it
>>
>> ___
>> 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



-- 
Jorge Sanz
http://www.osgeo.org
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jorge_Sanz
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] What would you want from an OSGeo Git Service ?

[Sandro Santilli]

On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 04:15:34PM +, Jody Garnett wrote:
> I think some kind of bridge to github is high on the list (viewing it more
> as an outreach marketing concern than anything). In my experience projects
> that are not officially on github get lots of unofficial forks - but that
> could depend on which are of the world you are in?

I agree for marketing being on github is helpful, and we're already
doing it with mirrors for GEOS/PostGIS (accepting pull requests but
not tickets).

What kind of bridge would you think it could be useful ?
Does it need to be built in the Git service or could it be
provided externally by OSGeo (like requested in this ticket
for mirroring tools: https://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/ticket/1654) ?

Would you want to bridge authentication or code or tickets ?

> I am very interested in maintaining an exit strategy for github given
> recent experience with Codehaus and SourceForge.

For the code, GIT has a built-in exit strategy (full history is
everywhere). What's problematic is tickets. When commit logs contain
references to issues by unqualified ticket number, they either refer
to one or the other ticketting system. Moving tickets away would mean
migrating the tickets data. I've heard mentioning a github API to
query tickets but didnt' do any research about existing migration
tools as I'm personally not planning to put tickets in there.

Anyway, I've added a raw to the comparison table for
"tool to migrate from github".

https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GitInfrastructureComparison

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