Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[DelazJ]

Hi,

I read this long and passionate thread and, that might have been
proposed earlier, in which case, apologies...but
In case it's not possible to directly state in the website, "Migrate
from XXX proprietary software", what about filling the "Migrate to
Open Source GIS" page with users/customers words? They'd share why
they choose an Open Source project, what they were looking for but
they could also explain why they left their old proprietary software
for a FOSS and if they are happy. I guess in that case it's not OSGeo
that's making a comparison or "tackling" any proprietary software -
just experiences sharing (i'm not a lawyer though).
In backend we could also keep the search tool (suggested by Sandro?)
that would bring newcomers to each story-telling related to a
proprietary tool when they search for that software (still without
exposing those softwares in our site).

Regards,
Harrissou

2017-09-21 23:52 GMT+02:00 Jody Garnett :
> Thanks Even I was going to try and circle back to this today.
>
> We do have the wish to list product names, notably for supported formats and
> interoperability. The http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/projects/geoserver/
> page lists for example:
>
> Server data from a variety of data sources
> Vector: Shapefiles, External WFS, PostGIS, ArcSDE, DB2, Oracle Spatial,
> MySql, SQL Server and more!
> Raster: GeoTiff, JPG and PNG (with world file), image pyramid, GDAL formats,
> Image Mosaic, Oracle GeoRaster, NetCDF
>
>
> We do have a legitimate reason to use product names, but there is reason to
> be careful/respectful when doing so. In the above list we should probably
> add SQLServer® for example, and a footnote to the page.
>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
> On 21 September 2017 at 12:10, Even Rouault 
> wrote:
>>
>> On jeudi 21 septembre 2017 11:20:54 CEST Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
>>
>> > We have that kind of page here
>>
>> > http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/about/migrate-open-source-gis/ ... The
>>
>> > link was removed from the hero area when Steve Feldman changed this in
>>
>> > Boston, so there is no content there now.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Are we not willing to even mention the names of these proprietary
>>
>> > products for fear of 'promoting' them? Or do we want to present the
>>
>> > user coming from outside our community some context about which open
>>
>> > source projects are an analogue or replacement for the proprietary
>>
>> > products they are already familiar with? Thats the real question in my
>>
>> > mind.
>>
>>
>>
>> I cannot honestly think that anyone would seriously believe we are
>> promoting
>>
>> proprietary software if they are mentionned under a "Migrate from" label.
>> But
>>
>> the point here about if we can legally use other product names (and if
>> that
>>
>> is a use of a trademark) in that context is a good one. They are probably
>> rules
>>
>> and good practices to follow in doing so, which can depend on juridictions
>> (probably
>>
>> US law applies here if the site is hosted in the US).
>>
>> Quickly researching about the topic leads to this article:
>>
>>
>> https://moz.com/blog/comparative-advertsing-can-i-talk-about-my-competitor-on-my-website
>>
>> The bottom line is that there are legal ways of comparing to a competitor
>> (is a
>>
>> "Migrate from " mention considered as comparative advertising is
>> another questio),
>>
>> but you can still be sued even if you follow the rules, so it is a matter
>> of
>>
>> appreciating the benefit vs the risk. Funnily they recommand to explictly
>> mention
>>
>> that you're not affiliated with the other product owner! (I guess that's
>> in the
>>
>> same vein as the "Caution: Contents Hot" mention on coffee cups ;-))
>>
>>
>>
>> I had a quick look at https://www.libreoffice.org/ to see if they for
>> example
>>
>> mentionned MS Office or Google docs. The only mention of MS Office I could
>> find
>>
>> is at the bottom of
>>
>> https://www.libreoffice.org/discover/libreoffice/ and it is a link to an
>> external
>>
>> site (they do mention the compatibility with Microsft Word, Excel,
>> *formats*,
>>
>> but that's a bit different than comparing to the products themselves).
>>
>> On http://www.openoffice.org/ similar situation, only mention of MS
>> formats,
>>
>> and for compraisons with MS itself, links to externals reviews from
>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/product/reviews.html
>>
>>
>>
>> Sandro mentionned GIMP's "like Photoshop, only better" motto but on
>>
>> https://www.gimp.org/ no mention of Photoshop I could find
>>
>>
>>
>> If you go on
>> http://www.pitneybowes.com/us/location-intelligence/geographic-information-systems/mapinfo-pro.html,
>>
>> no mention of ESRI
>>
>> Same on
>> http://www.hexagongeospatial.com/products/power-portfolio/erdas-imagine
>>
>>
>>
>> Just trying to decrease the emotional level of the debate with facts ;-)
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
>>
>> http://www.spatialys.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Membership process & email

[DelazJ]

Hi,

While I agree that all those seconding emails might flood some inboxes
(though most of modern mails have system to redirect and filter
messages), it was a real pleasure to see all the reaction from the
community: people I've never heard about, people I've never read a
message from (ok i'm not that long subscribed to the list) but from a
simple member of the community, it's just a: "WOUAW What a big and
passionate community!"
And I'm afraid that putting seconding messages elsewhere will just
hide this passion from the community, which imho deserves us: I'm
interested in knowing nominees profile (information sometimes brought
by seconding messages), but I'm not sure i will do the needed step to
check a wiki or a list elsewhere; having it in my box is just easier
and convenient.

my 2cts,
Harrissou

2017-09-08 18:49 GMT+02:00 María Arias de Reyna :
>
>
> On Sep 8, 2017 6:46 PM, "Massimiliano Cannata"
>  wrote:
>
> Why not just nominate people on the list but collect seconding on online
> system, like a form? SImilar to those for voting presentation at foss4g!!!
>
>
> In previous years it was like this and people still flood with +1. Also,
> this year people were sending proposals directly to the list instead of to
> the cro.
>
> We are rebels by nature. People will still send things to the list.
>
>
>
> Cheers
> Maxi
>
> 2017-09-08 17:56 GMT+02:00 Jody Garnett :
>>
>> The other point in favour of email is the discussion aspect, with the
>> board only reviewing -1 votes we are relying our the discussion list to
>> review candidates.
>>
>> --
>> Jody Garnett
>>
>> On 8 September 2017 at 07:36, Jorge Sanz  wrote:
>>>
>>> Agree, I don't think I'd like a nomination period + election being
>>> carried on with some editings in the wiki and a silent mailing list except
>>> by some announcements.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, answering with a +1 on a mailing list is quick and
>>> easy (and annoying if you don't use filters on your email).
>>>
>>> The off list option, like adding a comment on the wiki, (IMO) would be
>>> followed by fewer people and read by even fewer people. We are all lazy by
>>> nature, and an election process is not the most exciting activity we do.
>>>
>>> I agree the process can be improved, but when thinking about election
>>> procedures, as boring as they are, we need to put the reduction of
>>> participation barriers as a top priority if we want to reach the broadest
>>> audience, at least once per year.
>>>
>>> Anyway, I'm super happy to see such a big number of nominations, and I
>>> want to thank Vasile for the hard work and long hours he's dedicating to try
>>> to cup with such a demonstration of enthusiasm.
>>>
>>> My 2 cents
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8 September 2017 at 15:15, Volker Mische 
>>> wrote:

 Hi,

 I think it's valuable to have the nominations being sent to the discuss
 list, but I agree that seconding them should be off list.

 Cheers,
   Volker


 On 09/08/2017 01:01 PM, brandon whitehead wrote:
 > Hi,
 >
 > A potentially trivial change would be to keep the process the same,
 > but
 > run through the wiki---i.e. use a wiki page as the venue for
 > nominators
 > to log in and update/edit.  Freeze the page after a certain date, and
 > now there's an archived copy of the process.  Anyone interested in
 > real-time updates can simply log in and "follow" the page, others can
 > visit the page and check the results as they see fit.
 >
 > Note, this is conceptually the same process for nomination and voting,
 > but it is collated via the wiki instead of email.  This also doesn't
 > involve additional work to create an automated system.
 >
 > just a few thoughts from an interested lurker...
 > /Brandon
 >
 > On 08/09/2017 11:34, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
 >> Hi,
 >>
 >> There was a discussion with the CROs at yesterday's board meeting,
 >> and a
 >> proposal to use an automated system for nominations came up.
 >>
 >> Cheers,
 >> Angelos
 >>
 >> On 09/08/2017 01:01 PM, Till Adams wrote:
 >>> Jeroen,
 >>>
 >>> good motion! I feel the same and honestly am not able to read and
 >>> check
 >>> them all...
 >>>
 >>> Till
 >>>
 >>>
 >>> Am 08.09.2017 um 11:54 schrieb Jeroen Ticheler:
  Hi all,
  It is great to see the OSGeo community being so active and
  expanding!
  The process of proposing and voting new members is an extremely
  valuable part of that!
 
  The downside is that email traffic is exploding around this
  election.
  I fear the election processes in the coming years already. Should
  we
  find another way so propose and second nominees in the future to
  avoid