Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Listing of projects at OSGeo web site: NASA WorldWind

[Jeffrey Johnson]

We can work on the content from here and cut & paste from the public
site. At least the listing is there now.

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 8:50 PM, Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX)
 wrote:
> Jeffrey,
> I'm sure it needs work, this is not my bailiwick.
> Thanks for your concern and your help.
> Open source is the only way this world can come together.
> With plenty of room for value-added being well paid for.
> Without the ^commons^ of open source for core technology,
> we will never know the wonders of mutual benefit,
> via the proverbial wheel that need not be re-created.
> -Patrick
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeffrey Johnson [mailto:ortel...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 21, 2017 8:42 PM
> To: Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX)
> Cc: Jody Garnett; OSGeo Discussions
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Listing of projects at OSGeo web site: NASA 
> WorldWind
>
> http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/projects/esa-nasa-worldwind/ is up now.
> Thanks Patrick!
>
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 8:03 PM, Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX) 
>  wrote:
>> Jody,
>>
>> Not sure how to interpret your guidance. We’ve had our sleeves rolled
>> up and been pitching in without stop for as long as open source
>> virtual globes have existed. And I think ESA-NASA WorldWind is a bit
>> beyond incubation, we are more of a breeder farm for geospatial apps.
>> I am very sure there is a lot I need to better appreciate about open
>> source geospatial criteria. But please know that we, ESA and NASA, are
>> sincerely doing everything we can to deeply support the principles of OSGEO.
>>
>> -Patrick
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Jody Garnett [mailto:jody.garn...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, August 21, 2017 7:45 PM
>> To: Jeffrey Johnson; Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX)
>> Cc: OSGeo Discussions
>> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Listing of projects at OSGeo web site:
>> NASA WorldWind
>>
>>
>>
>> We also made a call for projects on this discussion list.
>>
>>
>> Patrick it would be great if you can list world wind on the website.
>> You are of course welcome to apply as an community project or to enter
>> the incubation program.
>>
>> As a volunteer driven organization we do not have the idea of
>> grandfathering in. We expect grandfathers to roll up their sleeves and pitch 
>> in.
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:29 PM Jeffrey Johnson  wrote:
>>
>> Patrick, you are welcome to include it. I can send you a login if you like.
>>
>> We made an open call on the projects list, but it seems many people
>> are not on this list.
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:23 PM, Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX)
>>  wrote:
>>> It appears that one of the original open source geospatial projects,
>>> well preceding OSGeo, and a project dedicated from its inception 15
>>> years ago to the principles and mission of OSGeo, does not seem to
>>> qualify as an OSGeo project, as much as we would care to be. Couldn't find 
>>> it on the website.
>>>
>>> Would have been nice to have been included, maybe as one 'grandfathered'
>>> in.
>>>
>>> NASA WorldWind (Java, Android and Web) is here for no less, and
>>> remains so for the OSGeo world community.
>>>
>>> -Patrick
>>> patrick.ho...@nasa.gov
>>> Project Manager
>>> https://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/
>>> ___
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> ___
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>> --
>>
>> --
>>
>> Jody Garnett
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Listing of projects at OSGeo web site: NASA WorldWind

[Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX)]

Jeffrey,
I'm sure it needs work, this is not my bailiwick. 
Thanks for your concern and your help.
Open source is the only way this world can come together.
With plenty of room for value-added being well paid for.
Without the ^commons^ of open source for core technology,
we will never know the wonders of mutual benefit,
via the proverbial wheel that need not be re-created.
-Patrick

-Original Message-
From: Jeffrey Johnson [mailto:ortel...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2017 8:42 PM
To: Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX)
Cc: Jody Garnett; OSGeo Discussions
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Listing of projects at OSGeo web site: NASA 
WorldWind

http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/projects/esa-nasa-worldwind/ is up now.
Thanks Patrick!

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 8:03 PM, Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX) 
 wrote:
> Jody,
>
> Not sure how to interpret your guidance. We’ve had our sleeves rolled 
> up and been pitching in without stop for as long as open source 
> virtual globes have existed. And I think ESA-NASA WorldWind is a bit 
> beyond incubation, we are more of a breeder farm for geospatial apps. 
> I am very sure there is a lot I need to better appreciate about open 
> source geospatial criteria. But please know that we, ESA and NASA, are 
> sincerely doing everything we can to deeply support the principles of OSGEO.
>
> -Patrick
>
>
>
> From: Jody Garnett [mailto:jody.garn...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 21, 2017 7:45 PM
> To: Jeffrey Johnson; Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX)
> Cc: OSGeo Discussions
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Listing of projects at OSGeo web site: 
> NASA WorldWind
>
>
>
> We also made a call for projects on this discussion list.
>
>
> Patrick it would be great if you can list world wind on the website. 
> You are of course welcome to apply as an community project or to enter 
> the incubation program.
>
> As a volunteer driven organization we do not have the idea of 
> grandfathering in. We expect grandfathers to roll up their sleeves and pitch 
> in.
>
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:29 PM Jeffrey Johnson  wrote:
>
> Patrick, you are welcome to include it. I can send you a login if you like.
>
> We made an open call on the projects list, but it seems many people 
> are not on this list.
>
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:23 PM, Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX) 
>  wrote:
>> It appears that one of the original open source geospatial projects, 
>> well preceding OSGeo, and a project dedicated from its inception 15 
>> years ago to the principles and mission of OSGeo, does not seem to 
>> qualify as an OSGeo project, as much as we would care to be. Couldn't find 
>> it on the website.
>>
>> Would have been nice to have been included, maybe as one 'grandfathered'
>> in.
>>
>> NASA WorldWind (Java, Android and Web) is here for no less, and 
>> remains so for the OSGeo world community.
>>
>> -Patrick
>> patrick.ho...@nasa.gov
>> Project Manager
>> https://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/
>> ___
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
> --
>
> --
>
> Jody Garnett
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Listing of projects at OSGeo web site: NASA WorldWind

[Jeffrey Johnson]

http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/projects/esa-nasa-worldwind/ is up now.
Thanks Patrick!

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 8:03 PM, Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX)
 wrote:
> Jody,
>
> Not sure how to interpret your guidance. We’ve had our sleeves rolled up and
> been pitching in without stop for as long as open source virtual globes have
> existed. And I think ESA-NASA WorldWind is a bit beyond incubation, we are
> more of a breeder farm for geospatial apps. I am very sure there is a lot I
> need to better appreciate about open source geospatial criteria. But please
> know that we, ESA and NASA, are sincerely doing everything we can to deeply
> support the principles of OSGEO.
>
> -Patrick
>
>
>
> From: Jody Garnett [mailto:jody.garn...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 21, 2017 7:45 PM
> To: Jeffrey Johnson; Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX)
> Cc: OSGeo Discussions
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Listing of projects at OSGeo web site: NASA
> WorldWind
>
>
>
> We also made a call for projects on this discussion list.
>
>
> Patrick it would be great if you can list world wind on the website. You are
> of course welcome to apply as an community project or to enter the
> incubation program.
>
> As a volunteer driven organization we do not have the idea of grandfathering
> in. We expect grandfathers to roll up their sleeves and pitch in.
>
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:29 PM Jeffrey Johnson  wrote:
>
> Patrick, you are welcome to include it. I can send you a login if you like.
>
> We made an open call on the projects list, but it seems many people
> are not on this list.
>
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:23 PM, Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX)
>  wrote:
>> It appears that one of the original open source geospatial projects, well
>> preceding OSGeo, and a project dedicated from its inception 15 years ago to
>> the principles and mission of OSGeo, does not seem to qualify as an OSGeo
>> project, as much as we would care to be. Couldn't find it on the website.
>>
>> Would have been nice to have been included, maybe as one 'grandfathered'
>> in.
>>
>> NASA WorldWind (Java, Android and Web) is here for no less, and remains so
>> for the OSGeo world community.
>>
>> -Patrick
>> patrick.ho...@nasa.gov
>> Project Manager
>> https://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/
>> ___
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
> --
>
> --
>
> Jody Garnett
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Listing of projects at OSGeo web site: NASA WorldWind

[Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX)]

Jody,
Not sure how to interpret your guidance. We’ve had our sleeves rolled up and 
been pitching in without stop for as long as open source virtual globes have 
existed. And I think ESA-NASA WorldWind is a bit beyond incubation, we are more 
of a breeder farm for geospatial apps. I am very sure there is a lot I need to 
better appreciate about open source geospatial criteria. But please know that 
we, ESA and NASA, are sincerely doing everything we can to deeply support the 
principles of OSGEO.
-Patrick

From: Jody Garnett [mailto:jody.garn...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2017 7:45 PM
To: Jeffrey Johnson; Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX)
Cc: OSGeo Discussions
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Listing of projects at OSGeo web site: NASA 
WorldWind

We also made a call for projects on this discussion list.

Patrick it would be great if you can list world wind on the website. You are of 
course welcome to apply as an community project or to enter the incubation 
program.

As a volunteer driven organization we do not have the idea of grandfathering 
in. We expect grandfathers to roll up their sleeves and pitch in.
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:29 PM Jeffrey Johnson 
> wrote:
Patrick, you are welcome to include it. I can send you a login if you like.

We made an open call on the projects list, but it seems many people
are not on this list.

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:23 PM, Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX)
> wrote:
> It appears that one of the original open source geospatial projects, well 
> preceding OSGeo, and a project dedicated from its inception 15 years ago to 
> the principles and mission of OSGeo, does not seem to qualify as an OSGeo 
> project, as much as we would care to be. Couldn't find it on the website.
>
> Would have been nice to have been included, maybe as one 'grandfathered' in.
>
> NASA WorldWind (Java, Android and Web) is here for no less, and remains so 
> for the OSGeo world community.
>
> -Patrick
> patrick.ho...@nasa.gov
> Project Manager
> https://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
--
--
Jody Garnett
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Listing of projects at OSGeo web site: NASA WorldWind

[Jody Garnett]

We also made a call for projects on this discussion list.

Patrick it would be great if you can list world wind on the website. You
are of course welcome to apply as an community project or to enter the
incubation program.

As a volunteer driven organization we do not have the idea of
grandfathering in. We expect grandfathers to roll up their sleeves and
pitch in.
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:29 PM Jeffrey Johnson  wrote:

> Patrick, you are welcome to include it. I can send you a login if you like.
>
> We made an open call on the projects list, but it seems many people
> are not on this list.
>
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:23 PM, Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX)
>  wrote:
> > It appears that one of the original open source geospatial projects,
> well preceding OSGeo, and a project dedicated from its inception 15 years
> ago to the principles and mission of OSGeo, does not seem to qualify as an
> OSGeo project, as much as we would care to be. Couldn't find it on the
> website.
> >
> > Would have been nice to have been included, maybe as one 'grandfathered'
> in.
> >
> > NASA WorldWind (Java, Android and Web) is here for no less, and remains
> so for the OSGeo world community.
> >
> > -Patrick
> > patrick.ho...@nasa.gov
> > Project Manager
> > https://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/
> > ___
> > Discuss mailing list
> > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

-- 
--
Jody Garnett
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Listing of projects at OSGeo web site: NASA WorldWind

[Jeffrey Johnson]

Patrick, you are welcome to include it. I can send you a login if you like.

We made an open call on the projects list, but it seems many people
are not on this list.

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 6:23 PM, Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX)
 wrote:
> It appears that one of the original open source geospatial projects, well 
> preceding OSGeo, and a project dedicated from its inception 15 years ago to 
> the principles and mission of OSGeo, does not seem to qualify as an OSGeo 
> project, as much as we would care to be. Couldn't find it on the website.
>
> Would have been nice to have been included, maybe as one 'grandfathered' in.
>
> NASA WorldWind (Java, Android and Web) is here for no less, and remains so 
> for the OSGeo world community.
>
> -Patrick
> patrick.ho...@nasa.gov
> Project Manager
> https://worldwind.arc.nasa.gov/
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposal for the listing of projects in our new web site

[Jeffrey Johnson]

Note the news section is intended for news related to a specific
service provider. Its *not* doing this now, so its unclear.

Can you file an issue about the search. Agree this should work for a
project name here.

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 5:17 PM, Jachym Cepicky
 wrote:
> hi,
>
> yes for me (OpenGeoLabs) it works as it is now - we are listed, we have
> links to projects we can support, there is logo, picture, web page, once it
> works, we are gonna be on the map, what could I possibly ask for more?  (if
> the graphics around "News" will be made more clear)
>
> side note: maybe adding note, that if you are searching for specifing
> service provider related to project, you should go to project page and find
> the service providers there, since search "geoserver" does not return any
> result at this page
>
> J
>
>
> út 22. 8. 2017 v 1:24 odesílatel Jody Garnett 
> napsal:
>>
>> Jeff have you heard from any small companies that feel alienated? For many
>> being a small company gives them a chance to offer personal service. I do
>> not want to make assumptions if we can help it.
>>
>> My feedback was actually focused on the site design, partnership & friend
>> relationships are appropriate for government and NGOs, geoforall labs are
>> the appropriate relationship for education and science etc. If that is clear
>> we can return to the earlier discussion - specifically about service
>> provider size. (we should also be sure to capture this discussion on the
>> issue tracker so it can actually inform the review of the website).
>>
>> Many of these decisions already took place during the earlier wireframe
>> stage of the project (by contributors who stepped up to the marketing
>> committee). We already went back to the drawing table on some of the key
>> decisions during wire framing and initial website design.
>>
>> To clearly set expectations - we will not have a chance to revisit each
>> and every decision due to limitations on time/budget. It is hard though,
>> because it is much easier to care about a website when it is pretty and we
>> can all see it :)
>>
>> My initial message to Jachym was trying to confirm that the organization
>> size worked for opengeolabs (simply because this was already a decision that
>> had been revisited once).
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 4:09 PM Jeff McKenna
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Jody,
>>>
>>> By alienating the smaller OSGeo companies in our new website, I don't
>>> see a benefit to OSGeo at all.  Let us please all sizes of OSGeo
>>> companies, small and big.
>>>
>>> Yes this is tricky, for sure, even your initial message to Jachym shows
>>> a lot of what it could be like, if OSGeo suddenly distinguishes size.
>>> Let's avoid this totally, I believe.
>>>
>>> I am open to other suggestions to the wording as well.
>>>
>>> Tricky!  :)
>>>
>>> -jeff
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2017-08-21 6:53 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>>> > I already changed it from number to the size thing.
>>> >
>>> > This list was for support providers (since the website is about
>>> > outreach
>>> > looks at projects, local chapters and service providers).
>>> >
>>> > GeoForAll labs and academic / research outreach are in slightly
>>> > different spot (we could cross link). See
>>> > http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/geo-for-all-labs/
>>> >
>>> > I do not think public:government, NGO/non-profit would like to be
>>> > contacted for commercial support :) That said they can be listed in our
>>> > site as partners and friends. Sort order is given to groups with a
>>> > defined relationship with OSGeo (such as ISPRS, LocationTech,...). See
>>> > http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/partners/
>>> >
>>> > Recognizing service providers on our website in this way is a new thing
>>> > - I hope it works out :)
>>> >
>>> > This design is full of difficult decisions thanks for contributing to
>>> > the discussion (and content).
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 3:30 PM Jeff McKenna
>>> > >
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hi Jachym,
>>> >
>>> > Yes I agree, it is a slippery slope that once we/OSGeo decide that
>>> > size
>>> > is an important part of our organization (as you know, many other
>>> > organizations separate their membership by size), it opens up so
>>> > many
>>> > other challenges.  For that reason, I spoke up here to suggest that
>>> > we
>>> > avoid all that, by suggesting 4 options to cover that.
>>> >
>>> > Indeed my proposal does include all organizations, purposely.
>>> > OSGeo is
>>> > built on that, and has done an amazing job in creating a thriving
>>> > community.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks for listening Jachym,
>>> >
>>> > -jeff
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 2017-08-21 6:17 PM, Jachym Cepicky wrote:
>>> >  > Hi Jeff (all)
>>> >  >
>>> >  > currently, the page is listing "service providers"  - it's
>>> > project
>>> >  

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] website rebranding feedback on discuss email list

[Jeffrey Johnson]

Lets bring this up with the vendor at our meeting on wednesday.

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 5:15 PM, Jody Garnett  wrote:
> Is that date going to be okay with our contract Jeffrey?
>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
> On 21 August 2017 at 17:14, Jeffrey Johnson  wrote:
>>
>> Also, please feel free to contact me if you would like a login and
>> have not been given one yet. Again note these will be migrated to
>> OSGeo LDAP accounts once we move the site to production. They are
>> temporary during this content collection Phase.
>>
>> It has been suggested we have a freeze date so we can review the
>> content as is and make some key design decisions. I think Sunday the
>> 27th would be a good day for this. Let me know if there are any
>> objections to that. If not, We can go ahead and lock the site from
>> further edits and continue to discuss issues here or on in the issues.
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 4:33 PM, Jody Garnett 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I hope it is okay having these website/rebranding discussion on discuss
>> > -
>> > while it is a key activity for our foundation we do not wish to be in
>> > the
>> > way :)
>> >
>> > Please take feedback to the issue tracker:
>> > https://github.com/osgeo/osgeo/issues
>> >
>> > Keep in mind:
>> >
>> > If you have a constructive idea to add into the mix, and are
>> > uncomfortable
>> > using discuss, please add it to the issue tracker directly.
>> > If you have a good idea that on one of these email discussion please,
>> > take a
>> > moment to add it to the issue tracker.
>> > There are a few section of the website still to be written/migrated.
>> >
>> > We will not be able to revisit every design decision, but if you have a
>> > question please speak up.
>> >
>> > Thanks to everyone who worked on adding content to the website at the
>> > foss4g
>> > code sprint, and everyone who has contributed to the issue tracker
>> > already.
>> > --
>> > Jody Garnett
>> >
>> > ___
>> > Discuss mailing list
>> > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposal for the listing of projects in our new web site

[Jody Garnett]

> 3) as mentioned in 2) it would be nice to have a place on our site to
> list organizations that are NOT looking for work, nor are a GeoForAll
> Lab, nor (yet) a sponsor or a partner (with a formal MOU). Perhaps
> they are important contributors to a project and would like to be
> listed somewhere. CSIRO comes to mind as an example. I think we DO
> need to think of perhaps a new content type to capture these and
> classify them appropriately and let them link to the projects they
> contribute to, resources they may have created etc. Perhaps just an
> 'Organizations' section that is much like the 'Service Providers' and
> GeoForAll labs, but is listed separately under Community, I can think
> of a lot of organizations who would be interested to be listed here.
>

See earlier, should be listed under Partners and Friends. List sorted so
that partners (MOU or other biz relationship) is sorted higher then people
we think are really cool and help further our objectives (like
OpenStreetMap which we promote as a source of open data).

I really like the "Partners and Friends" title, but we can rename it to
organizations / organisations if that makes everyone feel happy.

Hoping we can all agree on what we are talking about here and find a
> solution. I really want to find a place for *every* member of our
> community big or small to show off their work and make sure its linked
> to other content types (projects, resources, news etc) appropriately.
> This is of course a bit hard because we have such a diverse group of
> stakeholders, but Im confident we can work through it.
>

Very much agree. We also need to keep in mind that this website is for
visitors who are not yet part of our community. Steven called me out on
this several times on the weekend when rewriting our home page. So hard to
sneak a "how to help" button in, rather than a "how we can help you".

Jachym, just making sure you are happy with how OpenGeoLabs is currently
> listed?
>

Poor Jachym I was just trying to ask a question :)
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] website rebranding feedback on discuss email list

[Jody Garnett]

Is that date going to be okay with our contract Jeffrey?

--
Jody Garnett

On 21 August 2017 at 17:14, Jeffrey Johnson  wrote:

> Also, please feel free to contact me if you would like a login and
> have not been given one yet. Again note these will be migrated to
> OSGeo LDAP accounts once we move the site to production. They are
> temporary during this content collection Phase.
>
> It has been suggested we have a freeze date so we can review the
> content as is and make some key design decisions. I think Sunday the
> 27th would be a good day for this. Let me know if there are any
> objections to that. If not, We can go ahead and lock the site from
> further edits and continue to discuss issues here or on in the issues.
>
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 4:33 PM, Jody Garnett 
> wrote:
> >
> > I hope it is okay having these website/rebranding discussion on discuss -
> > while it is a key activity for our foundation we do not wish to be in the
> > way :)
> >
> > Please take feedback to the issue tracker:
> > https://github.com/osgeo/osgeo/issues
> >
> > Keep in mind:
> >
> > If you have a constructive idea to add into the mix, and are
> uncomfortable
> > using discuss, please add it to the issue tracker directly.
> > If you have a good idea that on one of these email discussion please,
> take a
> > moment to add it to the issue tracker.
> > There are a few section of the website still to be written/migrated.
> >
> > We will not be able to revisit every design decision, but if you have a
> > question please speak up.
> >
> > Thanks to everyone who worked on adding content to the website at the
> foss4g
> > code sprint, and everyone who has contributed to the issue tracker
> already.
> > --
> > Jody Garnett
> >
> > ___
> > Discuss mailing list
> > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] website rebranding feedback on discuss email list

[Jeffrey Johnson]

Also, please feel free to contact me if you would like a login and
have not been given one yet. Again note these will be migrated to
OSGeo LDAP accounts once we move the site to production. They are
temporary during this content collection Phase.

It has been suggested we have a freeze date so we can review the
content as is and make some key design decisions. I think Sunday the
27th would be a good day for this. Let me know if there are any
objections to that. If not, We can go ahead and lock the site from
further edits and continue to discuss issues here or on in the issues.

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 4:33 PM, Jody Garnett  wrote:
>
> I hope it is okay having these website/rebranding discussion on discuss -
> while it is a key activity for our foundation we do not wish to be in the
> way :)
>
> Please take feedback to the issue tracker:
> https://github.com/osgeo/osgeo/issues
>
> Keep in mind:
>
> If you have a constructive idea to add into the mix, and are uncomfortable
> using discuss, please add it to the issue tracker directly.
> If you have a good idea that on one of these email discussion please, take a
> moment to add it to the issue tracker.
> There are a few section of the website still to be written/migrated.
>
> We will not be able to revisit every design decision, but if you have a
> question please speak up.
>
> Thanks to everyone who worked on adding content to the website at the foss4g
> code sprint, and everyone who has contributed to the issue tracker already.
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposal for the listing of projects in our new web site

[Jeffrey Johnson]

Hi All,

I think we are talking about several different issues here. Let me try
to summarize.

1) JeffM is suggesting that we should *not* ask Service Providers what
size they are in terms of number of employees to avoid 'alienating'
them. I'm not sure I see how any would be alienated, but I dont think
this piece of data is all that important anyway. I think we originally
conceived of it to be able to separate out individual consultants and
small companies from larger ones. I know in my experience when looking
for a service provider, often I am specifically looking for small ones
or individual consultants because Im not interested in dealing with
big organizations. In any case, this service provider section should
be open to any and all organizations (from one person consultancies to
large organizations) that want to provide services for hire on OSGeo
or other open source geospatial projects. Its not that important to
*me* that we collect what size they are, but it may be useful to
others to know what size they are when looking for help.

2) JeffM is proposing we ask for the organization *type* here instead
of size and be inclusive of other types of organizations than just
companies. Im all for being as inclusive as we can, but this section
of the site was specifically intended as a place where one could find
organizations or individual consultants *for hire* to work on/with the
projects. As Jody mentions, there are lots of NGOs and government orgs
who would like to be listed somewhere on our site, but are NOT looking
for work. The converse is also true, there are lots of NGOs and and
perhaps even government agencies who are willing to do work for hire
and would like to be listed here as a service provider.

3) as mentioned in 2) it would be nice to have a place on our site to
list organizations that are NOT looking for work, nor are a GeoForAll
Lab, nor (yet) a sponsor or a partner (with a formal MOU). Perhaps
they are important contributors to a project and would like to be
listed somewhere. CSIRO comes to mind as an example. I think we DO
need to think of perhaps a new content type to capture these and
classify them appropriately and let them link to the projects they
contribute to, resources they may have created etc. Perhaps just an
'Organizations' section that is much like the 'Service Providers' and
GeoForAll labs, but is listed separately under Community, I can think
of a lot of organizations who would be interested to be listed here.

Hoping we can all agree on what we are talking about here and find a
solution. I really want to find a place for *every* member of our
community big or small to show off their work and make sure its linked
to other content types (projects, resources, news etc) appropriately.
This is of course a bit hard because we have such a diverse group of
stakeholders, but Im confident we can work through it.

Jachym, just making sure you are happy with how OpenGeoLabs is currently listed?

Kurt Menke if you are on this list, I intended to move Birds Eye GIS
from being listed as a GeoForAll Lab to being a Service Provider and
realize I got interrupted in the middle of doing it on Saturday and
now its simply deleted. Ill reach out to you personally to make sure
you get re-added in the right place.

Also, I realize
http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/geo-for-all-labs/attivarti-org/ is
another example of an organization that probably belongs in a new
section as described in 3)

Jeff

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Jody Garnett  wrote:
> Jeff have you heard from any small companies that feel alienated? For many
> being a small company gives them a chance to offer personal service. I do
> not want to make assumptions if we can help it.
>
> My feedback was actually focused on the site design, partnership & friend
> relationships are appropriate for government and NGOs, geoforall labs are
> the appropriate relationship for education and science etc. If that is clear
> we can return to the earlier discussion - specifically about service
> provider size. (we should also be sure to capture this discussion on the
> issue tracker so it can actually inform the review of the website).
>
> Many of these decisions already took place during the earlier wireframe
> stage of the project (by contributors who stepped up to the marketing
> committee). We already went back to the drawing table on some of the key
> decisions during wire framing and initial website design.
>
> To clearly set expectations - we will not have a chance to revisit each and
> every decision due to limitations on time/budget. It is hard though, because
> it is much easier to care about a website when it is pretty and we can all
> see it :)
>
> My initial message to Jachym was trying to confirm that the organization
> size worked for opengeolabs (simply because this was already a decision that
> had been revisited once).
>
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 4:09 PM Jeff McKenna 
> 

[OSGeo-Discuss] website rebranding feedback on discuss email list

[Jody Garnett]

I hope it is okay having these website/rebranding discussion on discuss -
while it is a key activity for our foundation we do not wish to be in the
way :)

Please take feedback to the issue tracker:
https://github.com/osgeo/osgeo/issues

Keep in mind:

   - If you have a constructive idea to add into the mix, and are
   uncomfortable using discuss, please add it to the issue tracker directly.
   - If you have a good idea that on one of these email discussion please,
   take a moment to add it to the issue tracker.
   - There are a few section of the website still to be written/migrated.

We will not be able to revisit every design decision, but if you have a
question please speak up.

Thanks to everyone who worked on adding content to the website at the
foss4g code sprint, and everyone who has contributed to the issue tracker
already.
--
Jody Garnett
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposal for the listing of projects in our new web site

[Jody Garnett]

Yeah does not appear to be hooked up yet the news - good note about the
sponsors - we should add to the issue tracker if you have not done so
already.

Aside: When I made a partner page I could hook up some events, projects,
resources.

--
Jody Garnett

On 21 August 2017 at 17:52, Jachym Cepicky  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> specifically this page, it's company, we are more people (about 5-7 - I do
> cover the accounting and paper work) - but it's official "ltd."
>
> I'm happy with the content (as I can only be) - do you have any problem
> with that?
>
> What IMHO does not work: the News are not clearly separated, it seems,
> they belong to the company - but they don't. Same applies to sponsors -
> some graphical element (ruler?) would make it more separated
>
> Thanks
>
> J
>
>
> po 21. 8. 2017 v 23:12 odesílatel Jody Garnett 
> napsal:
>
>> For your page http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/service-
>> providers/opengeolabs/ Is that a single consultant (you!) or a company?
>> (or perhaps it is just a company with one person in it)
>>
>> Are you happy with how that page is presented? Not sure about the news
>> items (checking now they do not really let us shortlist news or resources
>> yet)
>>
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 21 August 2017 at 12:45, Jachym Cepicky 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> afaik it was Vasile's overview
>>>
>>> just noting
>>>
>>> j
>>>
>>> On Mon, 21 Aug 2017, 17:59 Jody Garnett  wrote:
>>>
 That is perfect Jachym; at least for the beta website the "quick
 review" is the very few edit permissions we have handed out. I like how
 this discussion is covering what we should consider for listing "other" (or
 "foss4g") projects in the future.

 One of the coolest things I saw at the conference was a spreadsheet of
 open source spatial projects that Angelos had. It outlined and visualized
 several hundred open source spatial projects (most of which I had never
 heard of).



 --
 Jody Garnett

 On 21 August 2017 at 07:28, Jachym Cepicky 
 wrote:

> Hi,
>
> just noting: there can be currently "Community projects" and "Other
> projects" on the new OSGeo web page
>
> I agree, being "official OSGeo Community projects" requires some rules
> and approval process
>
> IMHO the "new proposed rules" are ok, if you want just your project
> appear on OSGeo Web page as "other project", it still should be
> peer-reviewed by some of the page administrators, but that would not make
> you to community project
>
> example: Yesterday I add Gisquick to new OSGeo web page
> http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/projects/gisquick/ it should be listed
> among "Other projects", not community
>
> hope, it's ok?
>
> J
>
>
>
> ne 20. 8. 2017 v 1:07 odesílatel James Klassen 
> napsal:
>
>> I generally agree with Even's comments.
>>
>> W.r.t. Not requireing other licenses clause, I would like to add a
>> question about how this would apply to free software that is mostly
>> intended to operate with non-free data?  e.g. GDAL drivers that enable
>> reading proprietary formats via a vendor SDK or formats that tend to only
>> be used with strictly licensed data or reading data from non-open 
>> standards
>> based web services (where you only control the client but the client is
>> pointless without a running server which requires its own separate 
>> license).
>>
>> On Aug 19, 2017 08:40, "Even Rouault" 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Angelos,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> thanks for turning those discussions into a positive way forward and
>>> your proposal sounds good to me. A few comments below.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > I would like to propose a way forward:
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > 1. We should *only* promote projects that are somehow affiliated
>>> with OSGeo
>>>
>>> > (as other Free and Open Source organizations do eg. Apache,
>>> Eclipse)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Makes sense. When you promote something on your website, you are
>>> somewhat responsible for it, so you must ensure that it meets some 
>>> minimum
>>> criteria that are in the "OSGeo spirit"
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > A proposal for *new* rules:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > * Has to have an OSI or FSF approved license and be found on the
>>> web in a
>>>
>>> > public place.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sounds obvious, but we should probably rephrase that "Source code is
>>> released with an OSI or FSF approved license and is available on the 
>>> web in
>>> a public place."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I know at least one project that is Apache licensed but released
>>> 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposal for the listing of projects in our new web site

[Jeff McKenna]

Hi Jody,

By alienating the smaller OSGeo companies in our new website, I don't 
see a benefit to OSGeo at all.  Let us please all sizes of OSGeo 
companies, small and big.


Yes this is tricky, for sure, even your initial message to Jachym shows 
a lot of what it could be like, if OSGeo suddenly distinguishes size. 
Let's avoid this totally, I believe.


I am open to other suggestions to the wording as well.

Tricky!  :)

-jeff





On 2017-08-21 6:53 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:

I already changed it from number to the size thing.

This list was for support providers (since the website is about outreach 
looks at projects, local chapters and service providers).


GeoForAll labs and academic / research outreach are in slightly 
different spot (we could cross link). See 
http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/geo-for-all-labs/


I do not think public:government, NGO/non-profit would like to be 
contacted for commercial support :) That said they can be listed in our 
site as partners and friends. Sort order is given to groups with a 
defined relationship with OSGeo (such as ISPRS, LocationTech,...). See 
http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/partners/


Recognizing service providers on our website in this way is a new thing 
- I hope it works out :)


This design is full of difficult decisions thanks for contributing to 
the discussion (and content).


On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 3:30 PM Jeff McKenna 
> 
wrote:


Hi Jachym,

Yes I agree, it is a slippery slope that once we/OSGeo decide that size
is an important part of our organization (as you know, many other
organizations separate their membership by size), it opens up so many
other challenges.  For that reason, I spoke up here to suggest that we
avoid all that, by suggesting 4 options to cover that.

Indeed my proposal does include all organizations, purposely.  OSGeo is
built on that, and has done an amazing job in creating a thriving
community.

Thanks for listening Jachym,

-jeff



On 2017-08-21 6:17 PM, Jachym Cepicky wrote:
 > Hi Jeff (all)
 >
 > currently, the page is listing "service providers"  - it's project
 > oriented (as providing services to projects)
 >
 > your proposal is shifting it little bit to "all organisations",
not even
 > service providing - but what is their releationship to the (osgeo)
 > projects? - still, it would be fine to me
 >
 > I would be +1 for it, if it's does not hit to some other principle,
 > already hardcoded in the page (e.g.
 > http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/initiatives/geo-for-all/ is partly
 > coreving the Academic/Research topic - just an example of potencial
 > conflict, which we could oversee)
 >
 > I do not know, just noting, I have no strong opinion - I want to be
 > inclusive, all for adding another categories, but the rules and
 > principals should be clear. Currently, how I understand it "you
can be
 > listed as long as you are providing services to projects"
 >
 > J
 >
 > út 22. 8. 2017 v 0:11 odesílatel Jeff McKenna
 > 
>>
 > napsal:
 >
 >     On 2017-08-21 5:11 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
 >      > For your page
 >      >
http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/service-providers/opengeolabs/ Is
 >     that a
 >      > single consultant (you!) or a company?
 >      > (or perhaps it is just a company with one person in it)
 >      >
 >
 >     Hi Jody,
 >
 >     Regarding separating the OSGeo community by size, I suggest
that we
 >     avoid offending our community members, so let's stay positive
and make
 >     the following change:
 >
 >     I recommend that we/OSGeo change the "Organization Type"
section to
 >     contain the following 4 options:
 >
 >        1. Private
 >        2. Academic/Research
 >        3. Public/Government
 >        4. Non-profit
 >
 >     The same 4 options should be applied to the options in the
"Filter"
 >     search on the site for "Service Provider Type".
 >
 >     Thanks.
 >
 >     Jachym: you did a great job on the OpenGeoLabs page, and
thanks for
 >     supporting OSGeo all of these years :)
 >
 >
 >     -jeff
 >
 >
 >
 >     --
 >     Jeff McKenna
 >     President Emeritus, OSGeo Foundation
 > http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna
 >
 >
___


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

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposal for the listing of projects in our new web site

[Jody Garnett]

I already changed it from number to the size thing.

This list was for support providers (since the website is about outreach
looks at projects, local chapters and service providers).

GeoForAll labs and academic / research outreach are in slightly different
spot (we could cross link). See
http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/geo-for-all-labs/

I do not think public:government, NGO/non-profit would like to be contacted
for commercial support :) That said they can be listed in our site as
partners and friends. Sort order is given to groups with a defined
relationship with OSGeo (such as ISPRS, LocationTech,...). See
http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/partners/

Recognizing service providers on our website in this way is a new thing - I
hope it works out :)

This design is full of difficult decisions thanks for contributing to the
discussion (and content).

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 3:30 PM Jeff McKenna 
wrote:

> Hi Jachym,
>
> Yes I agree, it is a slippery slope that once we/OSGeo decide that size
> is an important part of our organization (as you know, many other
> organizations separate their membership by size), it opens up so many
> other challenges.  For that reason, I spoke up here to suggest that we
> avoid all that, by suggesting 4 options to cover that.
>
> Indeed my proposal does include all organizations, purposely.  OSGeo is
> built on that, and has done an amazing job in creating a thriving
> community.
>
> Thanks for listening Jachym,
>
> -jeff
>
>
>
> On 2017-08-21 6:17 PM, Jachym Cepicky wrote:
> > Hi Jeff (all)
> >
> > currently, the page is listing "service providers"  - it's project
> > oriented (as providing services to projects)
> >
> > your proposal is shifting it little bit to "all organisations", not even
> > service providing - but what is their releationship to the (osgeo)
> > projects? - still, it would be fine to me
> >
> > I would be +1 for it, if it's does not hit to some other principle,
> > already hardcoded in the page (e.g.
> > http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/initiatives/geo-for-all/ is partly
> > coreving the Academic/Research topic - just an example of potencial
> > conflict, which we could oversee)
> >
> > I do not know, just noting, I have no strong opinion - I want to be
> > inclusive, all for adding another categories, but the rules and
> > principals should be clear. Currently, how I understand it "you can be
> > listed as long as you are providing services to projects"
> >
> > J
> >
> > út 22. 8. 2017 v 0:11 odesílatel Jeff McKenna
> > >
> > napsal:
> >
> > On 2017-08-21 5:11 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> >  > For your page
> >  > http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/service-providers/opengeolabs/ Is
> > that a
> >  > single consultant (you!) or a company?
> >  > (or perhaps it is just a company with one person in it)
> >  >
> >
> > Hi Jody,
> >
> > Regarding separating the OSGeo community by size, I suggest that we
> > avoid offending our community members, so let's stay positive and
> make
> > the following change:
> >
> > I recommend that we/OSGeo change the "Organization Type" section to
> > contain the following 4 options:
> >
> >1. Private
> >2. Academic/Research
> >3. Public/Government
> >4. Non-profit
> >
> > The same 4 options should be applied to the options in the "Filter"
> > search on the site for "Service Provider Type".
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Jachym: you did a great job on the OpenGeoLabs page, and thanks for
> > supporting OSGeo all of these years :)
> >
> >
> > -jeff
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jeff McKenna
> > President Emeritus, OSGeo Foundation
> > http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna
> >
> >
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

-- 
--
Jody Garnett
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposal for the listing of projects in our new web site

[Jeff McKenna]

Jachym, to clarify: any organization should be able to advertise their 
services for an OSGeo project, whether they are a non-profit or a 
research entity or a private company etc.  That is how my proposal 
avoids separating OSGeo organizations by size.


-jeff



On 2017-08-21 6:17 PM, Jachym Cepicky wrote:

Hi Jeff (all)

currently, the page is listing "service providers"  - it's project 
oriented (as providing services to projects)


your proposal is shifting it little bit to "all organisations", not even 
service providing - but what is their releationship to the (osgeo) 
projects? - still, it would be fine to me


I would be +1 for it, if it's does not hit to some other principle, 
already hardcoded in the page (e.g. 
http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/initiatives/geo-for-all/ is partly 
coreving the Academic/Research topic - just an example of potencial 
conflict, which we could oversee)


I do not know, just noting, I have no strong opinion - I want to be 
inclusive, all for adding another categories, but the rules and 
principals should be clear. Currently, how I understand it "you can be 
listed as long as you are providing services to projects"


J

út 22. 8. 2017 v 0:11 odesílatel Jeff McKenna 
> 
napsal:


On 2017-08-21 5:11 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
 > For your page
 > http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/service-providers/opengeolabs/ Is
that a
 > single consultant (you!) or a company?
 > (or perhaps it is just a company with one person in it)
 >

Hi Jody,

Regarding separating the OSGeo community by size, I suggest that we
avoid offending our community members, so let's stay positive and make
the following change:

I recommend that we/OSGeo change the "Organization Type" section to
contain the following 4 options:

   1. Private
   2. Academic/Research
   3. Public/Government
   4. Non-profit

The same 4 options should be applied to the options in the "Filter"
search on the site for "Service Provider Type".

Thanks.

Jachym: you did a great job on the OpenGeoLabs page, and thanks for
supporting OSGeo all of these years :)


-jeff



--
Jeff McKenna
President Emeritus, OSGeo Foundation
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna




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

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposal for the listing of projects in our new web site

[Jeff McKenna]

Hi Jachym,

Yes I agree, it is a slippery slope that once we/OSGeo decide that size 
is an important part of our organization (as you know, many other 
organizations separate their membership by size), it opens up so many 
other challenges.  For that reason, I spoke up here to suggest that we 
avoid all that, by suggesting 4 options to cover that.


Indeed my proposal does include all organizations, purposely.  OSGeo is 
built on that, and has done an amazing job in creating a thriving 
community.


Thanks for listening Jachym,

-jeff



On 2017-08-21 6:17 PM, Jachym Cepicky wrote:

Hi Jeff (all)

currently, the page is listing "service providers"  - it's project 
oriented (as providing services to projects)


your proposal is shifting it little bit to "all organisations", not even 
service providing - but what is their releationship to the (osgeo) 
projects? - still, it would be fine to me


I would be +1 for it, if it's does not hit to some other principle, 
already hardcoded in the page (e.g. 
http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/initiatives/geo-for-all/ is partly 
coreving the Academic/Research topic - just an example of potencial 
conflict, which we could oversee)


I do not know, just noting, I have no strong opinion - I want to be 
inclusive, all for adding another categories, but the rules and 
principals should be clear. Currently, how I understand it "you can be 
listed as long as you are providing services to projects"


J

út 22. 8. 2017 v 0:11 odesílatel Jeff McKenna 
> 
napsal:


On 2017-08-21 5:11 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
 > For your page
 > http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/service-providers/opengeolabs/ Is
that a
 > single consultant (you!) or a company?
 > (or perhaps it is just a company with one person in it)
 >

Hi Jody,

Regarding separating the OSGeo community by size, I suggest that we
avoid offending our community members, so let's stay positive and make
the following change:

I recommend that we/OSGeo change the "Organization Type" section to
contain the following 4 options:

   1. Private
   2. Academic/Research
   3. Public/Government
   4. Non-profit

The same 4 options should be applied to the options in the "Filter"
search on the site for "Service Provider Type".

Thanks.

Jachym: you did a great job on the OpenGeoLabs page, and thanks for
supporting OSGeo all of these years :)


-jeff



--
Jeff McKenna
President Emeritus, OSGeo Foundation
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna



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

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposal for the listing of projects in our new web site

[Jachym Cepicky]

Hi Jeff (all)

currently, the page is listing "service providers"  - it's project oriented
(as providing services to projects)

your proposal is shifting it little bit to "all organisations", not even
service providing - but what is their releationship to the (osgeo)
projects? - still, it would be fine to me

I would be +1 for it, if it's does not hit to some other principle, already
hardcoded in the page (e.g.
http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/initiatives/geo-for-all/ is partly coreving
the Academic/Research topic - just an example of potencial conflict, which
we could oversee)

I do not know, just noting, I have no strong opinion - I want to be
inclusive, all for adding another categories, but the rules and principals
should be clear. Currently, how I understand it "you can be listed as long
as you are providing services to projects"

J

út 22. 8. 2017 v 0:11 odesílatel Jeff McKenna 
napsal:

> On 2017-08-21 5:11 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> > For your page
> > http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/service-providers/opengeolabs/ Is that a
> > single consultant (you!) or a company?
> > (or perhaps it is just a company with one person in it)
> >
>
> Hi Jody,
>
> Regarding separating the OSGeo community by size, I suggest that we
> avoid offending our community members, so let's stay positive and make
> the following change:
>
> I recommend that we/OSGeo change the "Organization Type" section to
> contain the following 4 options:
>
>   1. Private
>   2. Academic/Research
>   3. Public/Government
>   4. Non-profit
>
> The same 4 options should be applied to the options in the "Filter"
> search on the site for "Service Provider Type".
>
> Thanks.
>
> Jachym: you did a great job on the OpenGeoLabs page, and thanks for
> supporting OSGeo all of these years :)
>
>
> -jeff
>
>
>
> --
> Jeff McKenna
> President Emeritus, OSGeo Foundation
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna
>
>
>
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposal for the listing of projects in our new web site

[Jeff McKenna]

On 2017-08-21 5:11 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
For your page 
http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/service-providers/opengeolabs/ Is that a 
single consultant (you!) or a company?

(or perhaps it is just a company with one person in it)



Hi Jody,

Regarding separating the OSGeo community by size, I suggest that we 
avoid offending our community members, so let's stay positive and make 
the following change:


I recommend that we/OSGeo change the "Organization Type" section to 
contain the following 4 options:


 1. Private
 2. Academic/Research
 3. Public/Government
 4. Non-profit

The same 4 options should be applied to the options in the "Filter" 
search on the site for "Service Provider Type".


Thanks.

Jachym: you did a great job on the OpenGeoLabs page, and thanks for 
supporting OSGeo all of these years :)



-jeff



--
Jeff McKenna
President Emeritus, OSGeo Foundation
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna



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

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] final call friday - for software projects on beta website

[Julien Moquet]

Hi,

I made the requested changes there :
http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/projects/proj4/?preview=true

It's nearby the OsGeoLive docs.

Regards,
Julien.



2017-08-17 3:03 GMT+02:00 Jody Garnett :

> Not too late it is only a beta, can you contact Jeffrey Johnson to get set
> up?
>
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 6:57 PM Julien Moquet 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Jody,
>>
>> I don't know if it is too late, but as we drop the Méta CRS project on
>> the OsgeoLive 11, may be can replace it by proj4 on the web site too.
>> I can help to do it (Kristian what do you think of ?).
>>
>> Regards,
>> Julien.
>>
>> Le 9 août 2017 19:27, "Jody Garnett"  a écrit :
>>
>>> Final call for projects to fill in information for the beta website,
>>> please have content in by Friday August 9th for inclusion in the beta
>>> website as shown at foss4g next week.
>>>
>>> The data collection forms are here:
>>>
>>>- Software Projects 
>>>- Service Providers 
>>>- Resources 
>>>
>>> If you have already provided your content - thank you. Please review the
>>> result online osgeo.getinteractive.nl/projects. We can make any
>>> corrections needed if you stop by the OSGeo booth.
>>>
>>> A reminder that this website is open to *all* open source spatial
>>> projects, so if your project is spatial please fill in the form to be
>>> listed.
>>> --
>>> Jody Garnett
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>
>> --
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposal for the listing of projects in our new web site

[Jody Garnett]

For your page http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/service-providers/opengeolabs/
Is that a single consultant (you!) or a company?
(or perhaps it is just a company with one person in it)

Are you happy with how that page is presented? Not sure about the news
items (checking now they do not really let us shortlist news or resources
yet)

--
Jody Garnett

On 21 August 2017 at 12:45, Jachym Cepicky  wrote:

> afaik it was Vasile's overview
>
> just noting
>
> j
>
> On Mon, 21 Aug 2017, 17:59 Jody Garnett  wrote:
>
>> That is perfect Jachym; at least for the beta website the "quick review"
>> is the very few edit permissions we have handed out. I like how this
>> discussion is covering what we should consider for listing "other" (or
>> "foss4g") projects in the future.
>>
>> One of the coolest things I saw at the conference was a spreadsheet of
>> open source spatial projects that Angelos had. It outlined and visualized
>> several hundred open source spatial projects (most of which I had never
>> heard of).
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 21 August 2017 at 07:28, Jachym Cepicky 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> just noting: there can be currently "Community projects" and "Other
>>> projects" on the new OSGeo web page
>>>
>>> I agree, being "official OSGeo Community projects" requires some rules
>>> and approval process
>>>
>>> IMHO the "new proposed rules" are ok, if you want just your project
>>> appear on OSGeo Web page as "other project", it still should be
>>> peer-reviewed by some of the page administrators, but that would not make
>>> you to community project
>>>
>>> example: Yesterday I add Gisquick to new OSGeo web page
>>> http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/projects/gisquick/ it should be listed
>>> among "Other projects", not community
>>>
>>> hope, it's ok?
>>>
>>> J
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ne 20. 8. 2017 v 1:07 odesílatel James Klassen 
>>> napsal:
>>>
 I generally agree with Even's comments.

 W.r.t. Not requireing other licenses clause, I would like to add a
 question about how this would apply to free software that is mostly
 intended to operate with non-free data?  e.g. GDAL drivers that enable
 reading proprietary formats via a vendor SDK or formats that tend to only
 be used with strictly licensed data or reading data from non-open standards
 based web services (where you only control the client but the client is
 pointless without a running server which requires its own separate 
 license).

 On Aug 19, 2017 08:40, "Even Rouault" 
 wrote:

> Hi Angelos,
>
>
>
> thanks for turning those discussions into a positive way forward and
> your proposal sounds good to me. A few comments below.
>
>
>
> >
>
> > I would like to propose a way forward:
>
> >
>
> > 1. We should *only* promote projects that are somehow affiliated
> with OSGeo
>
> > (as other Free and Open Source organizations do eg. Apache, Eclipse)
>
>
>
> Makes sense. When you promote something on your website, you are
> somewhat responsible for it, so you must ensure that it meets some minimum
> criteria that are in the "OSGeo spirit"
>
>
>
> > A proposal for *new* rules:
>
>
>
> > * Has to have an OSI or FSF approved license and be found on the web
> in a
>
> > public place.
>
>
>
> Sounds obvious, but we should probably rephrase that "Source code is
> released with an OSI or FSF approved license and is available on the web 
> in
> a public place."
>
>
>
> I know at least one project that is Apache licensed but released only
> as binaries, which makes it not very convenient to modify :-)
>
>
>
> > * Has to be useful on its own with normal data, and NOT require
> another
>
> > license to really use it
>
>
>
> Is it something that is currently required for graduation ? I don't
> see this criterion mentioned in
>
> http://www.osgeo.org/incubator/process/project_
> graduation_checklist.html
>
>
>
> That one is probably tricky to write correctly. Stated like this, that
> would for example exclude a Windows executable, since to use it you must
> own a Windows license... Even if you take a Linux executable that is X/MIT
> licensed, it links against the GNU libc that is GPL licensed (but as GNU
> libc is considered part of the OS, there's a provision in the GPL license
> to not apply the GPL obligations to the code that links to it). Or if you
> take a Java program, it must run within a JVM that comes with its own
> license. Same for Python, etc...
>
>
>
> But beyond this nitpicking, that criterion can raise more fundamental
> debates:
>
> * is the intent to 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposal for the listing of projects in our new web site

[Jody Garnett]

My bad, it is hard to keep up with so many amazing contributors :)

--
Jody Garnett

On 21 August 2017 at 12:45, Jachym Cepicky  wrote:

> afaik it was Vasile's overview
>
> just noting
>
> j
>
> On Mon, 21 Aug 2017, 17:59 Jody Garnett  wrote:
>
>> That is perfect Jachym; at least for the beta website the "quick review"
>> is the very few edit permissions we have handed out. I like how this
>> discussion is covering what we should consider for listing "other" (or
>> "foss4g") projects in the future.
>>
>> One of the coolest things I saw at the conference was a spreadsheet of
>> open source spatial projects that Angelos had. It outlined and visualized
>> several hundred open source spatial projects (most of which I had never
>> heard of).
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 21 August 2017 at 07:28, Jachym Cepicky 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> just noting: there can be currently "Community projects" and "Other
>>> projects" on the new OSGeo web page
>>>
>>> I agree, being "official OSGeo Community projects" requires some rules
>>> and approval process
>>>
>>> IMHO the "new proposed rules" are ok, if you want just your project
>>> appear on OSGeo Web page as "other project", it still should be
>>> peer-reviewed by some of the page administrators, but that would not make
>>> you to community project
>>>
>>> example: Yesterday I add Gisquick to new OSGeo web page
>>> http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/projects/gisquick/ it should be listed
>>> among "Other projects", not community
>>>
>>> hope, it's ok?
>>>
>>> J
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ne 20. 8. 2017 v 1:07 odesílatel James Klassen 
>>> napsal:
>>>
 I generally agree with Even's comments.

 W.r.t. Not requireing other licenses clause, I would like to add a
 question about how this would apply to free software that is mostly
 intended to operate with non-free data?  e.g. GDAL drivers that enable
 reading proprietary formats via a vendor SDK or formats that tend to only
 be used with strictly licensed data or reading data from non-open standards
 based web services (where you only control the client but the client is
 pointless without a running server which requires its own separate 
 license).

 On Aug 19, 2017 08:40, "Even Rouault" 
 wrote:

> Hi Angelos,
>
>
>
> thanks for turning those discussions into a positive way forward and
> your proposal sounds good to me. A few comments below.
>
>
>
> >
>
> > I would like to propose a way forward:
>
> >
>
> > 1. We should *only* promote projects that are somehow affiliated
> with OSGeo
>
> > (as other Free and Open Source organizations do eg. Apache, Eclipse)
>
>
>
> Makes sense. When you promote something on your website, you are
> somewhat responsible for it, so you must ensure that it meets some minimum
> criteria that are in the "OSGeo spirit"
>
>
>
> > A proposal for *new* rules:
>
>
>
> > * Has to have an OSI or FSF approved license and be found on the web
> in a
>
> > public place.
>
>
>
> Sounds obvious, but we should probably rephrase that "Source code is
> released with an OSI or FSF approved license and is available on the web 
> in
> a public place."
>
>
>
> I know at least one project that is Apache licensed but released only
> as binaries, which makes it not very convenient to modify :-)
>
>
>
> > * Has to be useful on its own with normal data, and NOT require
> another
>
> > license to really use it
>
>
>
> Is it something that is currently required for graduation ? I don't
> see this criterion mentioned in
>
> http://www.osgeo.org/incubator/process/project_
> graduation_checklist.html
>
>
>
> That one is probably tricky to write correctly. Stated like this, that
> would for example exclude a Windows executable, since to use it you must
> own a Windows license... Even if you take a Linux executable that is X/MIT
> licensed, it links against the GNU libc that is GPL licensed (but as GNU
> libc is considered part of the OS, there's a provision in the GPL license
> to not apply the GPL obligations to the code that links to it). Or if you
> take a Java program, it must run within a JVM that comes with its own
> license. Same for Python, etc...
>
>
>
> But beyond this nitpicking, that criterion can raise more fundamental
> debates:
>
> * is the intent to exclude projects that would be open-source released
> plugins of a proprietary software for example (the plugin could be an
> exporter from proprietary formats/projects to open source ones for 
> example)
> ?
>
> * Or open-source released 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposal for the listing of projects in our new web site

[Jachym Cepicky]

afaik it was Vasile's overview

just noting

j

On Mon, 21 Aug 2017, 17:59 Jody Garnett  wrote:

> That is perfect Jachym; at least for the beta website the "quick review"
> is the very few edit permissions we have handed out. I like how this
> discussion is covering what we should consider for listing "other" (or
> "foss4g") projects in the future.
>
> One of the coolest things I saw at the conference was a spreadsheet of
> open source spatial projects that Angelos had. It outlined and visualized
> several hundred open source spatial projects (most of which I had never
> heard of).
>
>
>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
> On 21 August 2017 at 07:28, Jachym Cepicky 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> just noting: there can be currently "Community projects" and "Other
>> projects" on the new OSGeo web page
>>
>> I agree, being "official OSGeo Community projects" requires some rules
>> and approval process
>>
>> IMHO the "new proposed rules" are ok, if you want just your project
>> appear on OSGeo Web page as "other project", it still should be
>> peer-reviewed by some of the page administrators, but that would not make
>> you to community project
>>
>> example: Yesterday I add Gisquick to new OSGeo web page
>> http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/projects/gisquick/ it should be listed
>> among "Other projects", not community
>>
>> hope, it's ok?
>>
>> J
>>
>>
>>
>> ne 20. 8. 2017 v 1:07 odesílatel James Klassen 
>> napsal:
>>
>>> I generally agree with Even's comments.
>>>
>>> W.r.t. Not requireing other licenses clause, I would like to add a
>>> question about how this would apply to free software that is mostly
>>> intended to operate with non-free data?  e.g. GDAL drivers that enable
>>> reading proprietary formats via a vendor SDK or formats that tend to only
>>> be used with strictly licensed data or reading data from non-open standards
>>> based web services (where you only control the client but the client is
>>> pointless without a running server which requires its own separate license).
>>>
>>> On Aug 19, 2017 08:40, "Even Rouault" 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Angelos,



 thanks for turning those discussions into a positive way forward and
 your proposal sounds good to me. A few comments below.



 >

 > I would like to propose a way forward:

 >

 > 1. We should *only* promote projects that are somehow affiliated with
 OSGeo

 > (as other Free and Open Source organizations do eg. Apache, Eclipse)



 Makes sense. When you promote something on your website, you are
 somewhat responsible for it, so you must ensure that it meets some minimum
 criteria that are in the "OSGeo spirit"



 > A proposal for *new* rules:



 > * Has to have an OSI or FSF approved license and be found on the web
 in a

 > public place.



 Sounds obvious, but we should probably rephrase that "Source code is
 released with an OSI or FSF approved license and is available on the web in
 a public place."



 I know at least one project that is Apache licensed but released only
 as binaries, which makes it not very convenient to modify :-)



 > * Has to be useful on its own with normal data, and NOT require
 another

 > license to really use it



 Is it something that is currently required for graduation ? I don't see
 this criterion mentioned in

 http://www.osgeo.org/incubator/process/project_graduation_checklist.html



 That one is probably tricky to write correctly. Stated like this, that
 would for example exclude a Windows executable, since to use it you must
 own a Windows license... Even if you take a Linux executable that is X/MIT
 licensed, it links against the GNU libc that is GPL licensed (but as GNU
 libc is considered part of the OS, there's a provision in the GPL license
 to not apply the GPL obligations to the code that links to it). Or if you
 take a Java program, it must run within a JVM that comes with its own
 license. Same for Python, etc...



 But beyond this nitpicking, that criterion can raise more fundamental
 debates:

 * is the intent to exclude projects that would be open-source released
 plugins of a proprietary software for example (the plugin could be an
 exporter from proprietary formats/projects to open source ones for example)
 ?

 * Or open-source released projects that would connect to a proprietary
 server (just saw in LWN headlines that Debian is currently debating whether
 they should allow OSS software that connect to proprietary services) ?

 * What about a fully open-source project that connects to a proprietary
 service ?



 If I take the exemple of 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo's GSoC 2017: final

[SERGIO ACOSTAYLARA]

And I'll like to thank you: great work!

Sergio Acosta y Lara
Departamento de Geomática
Dirección Nacional de Topografía
Ministerio de Transporte y Obras Públicas
URUGUAY
(598)29157933 ints. 20329/20330
http://geoportal.mtop.gub.uy/


De: Discuss  en nombre de Helmut Kudrnovsky 

Enviado: sábado, 19 de agosto de 2017 6:41
Para: OSGeo Discussions
Cc: gsoc-ad...@osgeo.org
Asunto: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo's GSoC 2017: final

Dear OSGeo community,

OSGeo's GSoC year 2017 will be finished by the end of this month [1].

This year's nice projects can be found at [2] and [3] (with a link to their 
public available code repositories).

If interested, the students' weekly reports from the last 3 months are 
available to read [4]; in the upcoming days there will be also their final 
reports of their coding projects in this list.

We would like to thank the students for their commitment and thank all the 
mentors that dedicated their valuable time to their guidance.

We wish the students good luck for the final evaluations!

Kind regards
OSGeo GSoC admins

[1] https://developers.google.com/open-source/gsoc/timeline
[2] https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/organizations/4660070039158784/
[3] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Google_Summer_of_Code_2017_Accepted
[4] https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/soc
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Non-precise framing can hurt the community

[Jachym Cepicky]

Hi,

I'm all for promoting "as much free and open source software for
geospatial" as possible on our web page. Our target is community outreach,
to destroy borders, this IMHO is part of our vision and mission [1]
OSGeo VisionEmpower everyone with open source geospatialOSGeo Mission
Statement

Foster global adoption of open geospatial technology by being an inclusive
software foundation devoted to an open philosophy and participatory
community driven development.

[1] http://www.osgeo.org/content/foundation/about.html

I do not care much about LocationTech's business and I did not see any act
- open or hidden - which would violate our vision or mission and that would
be in contradiction to what we do. Quite opposite, I see LocationTech
promoting the open (and OSGeo) idea quite a lot. Still, their business is
different from ours.

We are open community - and that includes (among others) LocationTech - do
not take this value from us.

The same way, some OSGeo members are looking at LocationTech, could OGC
look at OSGeo - with our "community" standards initiative, we are covering
some of their agenda. Yet I did not see that happen, since the final target
is different (even global mission is similar)

This is just my opinion, my $0.02 to the repeating discussion. You surely
can disagree

Jachym

P.S. Thank you all "LocationTech insiders", who are working for OSGeo,
great job!

so 19. 8. 2017 v 2:53 odesílatel Maria Antonia Brovelli <
maria.brove...@polimi.it> napsal:

> Dear Helmut
> I think that your question are relevant. Thank you so much!
> Jeffrey did an excellent work (thanks also  to you) in trying to make the
> new website ready in beta version for FOSS4G 2018.
> It is a sort of draft website and every comment is welcome.
> In the hurry of the last period and the overlappinh holidays of many
> people we have not had time to check it.
> But the website is our window and we have to decide what we want to show
> to the world. Therefore it deserves time for checking and also finding
> agreements among us.
> I agree with the proposal of Maxi to freeze it and give the possibility to
> the community to express themselves on this important topic.
> I will take my time in next weeks to check it and I ask everybody of the
> community to do the same and share their thoughts.
> Thanks again for your precious help!
> Best
> Maria
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent from my Samsung device
>
>
>  Original message 
> From: Helmut Kudrnovsky 
> Date: 18/08/2017 17:00 (GMT-05:00)
> To: Marc Vloemans , ragha...@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp,
> hmit...@ncsu.edu
> Cc: OSGeo Discussions , Sandro Santilli <
> s...@kbt.io>
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Non-precise framing can hurt the community
>
> Dear Venka, Dear Helena, Dear Marc, Dear OSGeo Community,
>
> I'm some kind of surprised about the reactions and long threads about my
> question yesterday.
>
> Just back from a long walk along a nice alpine river where I had time to
> contemplate about it. Therefore it will be a personal and some kind of
> philosophical note.
>
> In my personal, cultural and scientific background I was educated that
> asking questions isn't anything bad.
>
> * Asking questions regarding things I'm interested in, to learn more about
> it ...
> * Asking questions regarding things I'm interested in, I'm involved, and
> where I have some kind of responsibility, to take care that it evolves in a
> sustainable way ...
>
> citing [1]:
>
> "The third category is Charter Member. Individuals in this category have
> the same rights as the above Member category, but with two important
> differences. Firstly, individuals in this category are not self-selected,
> but rather must be voted into this category by the other Charter Members.
> Secondly, individuals in this category have the right to vote in elections
> for other Charter Members, and for Board Members.
>
> These two factors are intended to maintain the integrity of the
> Foundation election processes -- and by extension the integrity of the
> Foundation itself. We use the term "Charter" Member to explicitly indicate
> that these members are responsible for upholding the "charter" of the
> Foundation."
>
> As I'm honoured to be elected an OSGeo charter member, this is a high
> motivation for me to volunteer e.g. this year as OSGeo GSoC admin, to have
> fun within the GRASS community and to promote OSGeo and free and open
> source GIS whenever I have a chance to do so... and from time to time it
> encourages me to ask questions about OSGeo's evolution. So here we are now
> ...
>
> Community and communication  both have the same latin word stem:
> communis.
>
> I like OSGeo's do-ocracy :-) ... but also I think it's now time to
> rephrase the open source mantra to "communicate often, communicate early"
> :-) ... that OSGeo is able to evolve in a sustainable way!
>
> Kind regards
> Helmut
>
> [1] http://www.osgeo.org/Membership
>
> Gesendet: 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proposal for the listing of projects in our new web site

[Jachym Cepicky]

Hi,

just noting: there can be currently "Community projects" and "Other
projects" on the new OSGeo web page

I agree, being "official OSGeo Community projects" requires some rules and
approval process

IMHO the "new proposed rules" are ok, if you want just your project appear
on OSGeo Web page as "other project", it still should be peer-reviewed by
some of the page administrators, but that would not make you to community
project

example: Yesterday I add Gisquick to new OSGeo web page
http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/projects/gisquick/ it should be listed among
"Other projects", not community

hope, it's ok?

J



ne 20. 8. 2017 v 1:07 odesílatel James Klassen 
napsal:

> I generally agree with Even's comments.
>
> W.r.t. Not requireing other licenses clause, I would like to add a
> question about how this would apply to free software that is mostly
> intended to operate with non-free data?  e.g. GDAL drivers that enable
> reading proprietary formats via a vendor SDK or formats that tend to only
> be used with strictly licensed data or reading data from non-open standards
> based web services (where you only control the client but the client is
> pointless without a running server which requires its own separate license).
>
> On Aug 19, 2017 08:40, "Even Rouault"  wrote:
>
>> Hi Angelos,
>>
>>
>>
>> thanks for turning those discussions into a positive way forward and your
>> proposal sounds good to me. A few comments below.
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>>
>> > I would like to propose a way forward:
>>
>> >
>>
>> > 1. We should *only* promote projects that are somehow affiliated with
>> OSGeo
>>
>> > (as other Free and Open Source organizations do eg. Apache, Eclipse)
>>
>>
>>
>> Makes sense. When you promote something on your website, you are somewhat
>> responsible for it, so you must ensure that it meets some minimum criteria
>> that are in the "OSGeo spirit"
>>
>>
>>
>> > A proposal for *new* rules:
>>
>>
>>
>> > * Has to have an OSI or FSF approved license and be found on the web in
>> a
>>
>> > public place.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sounds obvious, but we should probably rephrase that "Source code is
>> released with an OSI or FSF approved license and is available on the web in
>> a public place."
>>
>>
>>
>> I know at least one project that is Apache licensed but released only as
>> binaries, which makes it not very convenient to modify :-)
>>
>>
>>
>> > * Has to be useful on its own with normal data, and NOT require another
>>
>> > license to really use it
>>
>>
>>
>> Is it something that is currently required for graduation ? I don't see
>> this criterion mentioned in
>>
>> http://www.osgeo.org/incubator/process/project_graduation_checklist.html
>>
>>
>>
>> That one is probably tricky to write correctly. Stated like this, that
>> would for example exclude a Windows executable, since to use it you must
>> own a Windows license... Even if you take a Linux executable that is X/MIT
>> licensed, it links against the GNU libc that is GPL licensed (but as GNU
>> libc is considered part of the OS, there's a provision in the GPL license
>> to not apply the GPL obligations to the code that links to it). Or if you
>> take a Java program, it must run within a JVM that comes with its own
>> license. Same for Python, etc...
>>
>>
>>
>> But beyond this nitpicking, that criterion can raise more fundamental
>> debates:
>>
>> * is the intent to exclude projects that would be open-source released
>> plugins of a proprietary software for example (the plugin could be an
>> exporter from proprietary formats/projects to open source ones for example)
>> ?
>>
>> * Or open-source released projects that would connect to a proprietary
>> server (just saw in LWN headlines that Debian is currently debating whether
>> they should allow OSS software that connect to proprietary services) ?
>>
>> * What about a fully open-source project that connects to a proprietary
>> service ?
>>
>>
>>
>> If I take the exemple of GDAL, the following situations can be found:
>>
>> * it is X/MIT licensed but can link to a few GPL licensed lib (poppler,
>> GRASS, ...)
>>
>> * it can link to proprietrary licensed libs
>>
>> * it can interact with proprietary services that have a public API, but
>> don't require linking against proprietary code
>>
>> * other/most parts are fully useful on their own
>>
>>
>>
>> So I think this question alone could deserve its own thread.
>>
>>
>>
>> > The project should need to officially apply for being included as OSGeo
>>
>> > Community Project, by answering a questionnaire (including information
>>
>> > gathering for the web site and provide a point of contact for
>> maintaining
>>
>> > that information in the future)
>>
>>
>>
>> +1
>>
>>
>>
>> Relation question: if OSGeo website promotes a community project, should
>> the website of this project (or github page if no dedicated website) links
>> to OSGeo one ? I'm not even sure this is a requirement for a graduated
>> project.
>>
>>
>>
>>