Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] The International Day of Non-Violence

2023-10-04 Thread Steven Feldman via Discuss 
Barend,

Thank you, I am relieved that someone understood my intent which was to keep 
the Discuss list “on topic”

Suchith, 

I meant no disrespect to you. I applaud your commitment to social justice and 
inclusion but I don’t think OSGeo Discuss is the right forum for this (that is 
my opinion, others are welcome to disagree)
__
Steven

: @stevenfeldman <https://mastodon.me.uk/@stevenfeldman>
- Unusual maps in strange places -  mappery.org <http://mappery.org/>
- Co-host of the Geomob podcast <https://thegeomob.com/podcast>
- Subscribe to my weekly “Maps in the Wild <http://eepurl.com/dKStT-/>” 
newsletter

> On 4 Oct 2023, at 16:59, Kobben, Barend (UT-ITC)  
> wrote:
> 
> I totally agree with inclusivity and so on, but that was not he point Steven 
> made.
>  
> The point was that the post’s subject  was not fitting the subject matter of 
> the email group “OSGEO-Discuss” that is “the public list to talk about the 
> Open Source Geospatial Foundation (OSGeo) in general.” – this post was not 
> about the foundation and therefore was indeed better suited for other mailing 
> lits (geoForAll was suggested). 
>  
> It is basic netiquette to not use lists for off-topic messages...
>  
> Yours,
> -- 
> Barend Köbben
>  
>  
> On 04/10/2023, 17:53, "GeoForAll"  wrote:
>  
> I also second Sergio's comment and kindly ask everyone to be inclusive and 
> fair with the people proposing different perspectives.
>  
> Best regards to everyone.
> Maria 
>  
> Remote Sensing | Special Issue : Earth Observation and Citizen Contributed 
> Data for Urban Sustainability (mdpi.com) 
> <https://www.mdpi.com/journal/remotesensing/special_issues/EFHFG6F2FW>
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> Prof. Maria Antonia Brovelli
> 
> Professor of GIS and Digital Mapping
> Politecnico di Milano
> 
>  
> 
> P.zza Leonardo da Vinci, 32 - Building 3A (Palazzina Lerici) ground floor  - 
> 20133 Milano (Italy)
> 
> Tel. +39-02-23996242 - Mob. +39-328-0023867,  maria.brove...@polimi.it 
> <mailto:maria.brove...@polimi.it>
>  
> 
> Scopus Author ID: https://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.uri?authorId=6602533891
> 
> WoS Author ID: https://publons.com/researcher/2916607/maria-antonia-brovelli/
> 
> ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/-0003-3161-5561
> 
> Google Scholar ID: https://scholar.google.it/citations?hl=it=qXBjE_AJ
> 
> TIB-AV portal https://av.tib.eu/search?q=brovelli
>  
> Da: GeoForAll  per conto di 
> Moreno-Sanchez, Rafael via GeoForAll 
> Inviato: mercoledì 4 ottobre 2023 17:48
> A: SERGIO ACOSTAYLARA ; Suchith Anand 
> ; Steven Feldman 
> Cc: GeoForAll 
> Oggetto: Re: [Geo4All] [OSGeo-Discuss] The International Day of Non-Violence
>  
> I second Sergio’s comment. 
> We are a great community and we want to keep it like that even when we have 
> differences in perspectives and opinions.
>  
> Rafael
> 
> Rafael Moreno, Ph.D.
> Professor
> Department of Geography and Environmental Sciences
> University of Colorado Denver
> Office: North Classroom 3621, Auraria Campus
> Campus Box 172
> 1200 Larimer Street NC 3016-C
> Denver, CO 80204
> Fax 303-556-6197
> Website: https://clas.ucdenver.edu/directory/faculty-staff/Rafael-Moreno
>  
> From: GeoForAll  On Behalf Of SERGIO 
> ACOSTAYLARA via GeoForAll
> Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2023 7:38 AM
> To: Suchith Anand ; Steven Feldman 
> 
> Cc: GeoForAll 
> Subject: Re: [Geo4All] [OSGeo-Discuss] The International Day of Non-Violence
>  
> [External Email - Use Caution]
> Steven,
> 
> Sorry for intervening but I think that type of "reproach" should be done 
> privately. I know Suchith and I am sure that he does it with the best 
> intentions. At least your comment sounded a little out of touch to me. Let's 
> try to maintain a good communication environment.
> 
> Best,
> 
>  
> 
> Sergio Acosta y Lara
> Departamento de Geomática
> Dirección Nacional de Topografía
> Ministerio de Transporte y Obras Públicas
> URUGUAY
> (598)29157933 ints. 20329
> http://geoportal.mtop.gub.uy/
> De: Discuss  <mailto:discuss-boun...@lists.osgeo.org>> en nombre de Steven Feldman via 
> Discuss mailto:discuss@lists.osgeo.org>>
> Enviado: lunes, 2 de octubre de 2023 16:22:59
> Para: Suchith Anand
> Cc: GeoForAll; discuss@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:discuss@lists.osgeo.org>
> Asunto: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] The International Day of Non-Violence
>  
> Suchith  
>  
>  I’m missing something. 
>  
> Can you explain how this is relevant to OSGeo? Today is also the birthday of 
> King Richar

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] The International Day of Non-Violence

2023-10-02 Thread Steven Feldman via Discuss 
Suchith  I’m missing something. Can you explain how this is relevant to OSGeo? Today is also the birthday of King Richard 3rd of England, Groucho Marx, Coco the Clown, Robert Henry Lawrence Jr and many others but I don’t think any of them were open source digital geographers. I understand why you might admire Gandhi but others may not agree. OSGeo Discuss is not the place for these conversations imo, which is evidenced by the lack of response that such posts receivePerhaps the GeoforAll list is a more relevant place?RegardsStevenSent from my iPhoneOn 2 Oct 2023, at 08:49, Suchith Anand  wrote:















Dear colleagues





The International Day of Non-Violence is observed on 2 October, the birthday of Mahatma Gandhi, leader of the Indian independence movement and pioneer of the philosophy and strategy of non-violence.
 According to United Nations General Assembly resolution A/RES/61/271
 of 15 June 2007, which established the commemoration, the International Day is an occasion to "disseminate the message of non-violence, including through education and public awareness". The resolution reaffirms "the universal relevance of the principle of
 non-violence" and the desire "to secure a culture of peace, tolerance, understanding and non-violence".




Details at
https://www.un.org/en/observances/non-violence-day




I bow to Mahatma Gandhi on the special occasion of Gandhi Jayanti. Mahatma Gandhi's impact is global, motivating the entire humankind to further the spirit of unity and compassion. 







Best wishes




Suchith







Dr Suchith Anand

Senior Adviser to Governments and International Organisations | Scientist | AI Ethics | AI Governance | Policy | Consultant in Data and AI Ethics | Global Citizen | SDG Volunteer and Advocate




https://council.science/profile/suchith-anand/

https://www.rd-alliance.org/users/suchith-anand

https://ethicaldatainitiative.org






This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and delete the email and attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
 author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham. Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored where permitted by law.


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

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Discuss Digest, Vol 200, Issue 13

2023-08-30 Thread Steven Feldman via Discuss 
Suchith

I understand that you are proud of India’s achievement but I cannot work out 
why you think that this is a suitable topic for OSGeo Discuss? Please keep your 
posts broadly on topic - discussion of Open Source Geo or the OSGeo organisation

Best wishes
__
Steven

: @stevenfeldman 
- Unusual maps in strange places -  mappery.org 
- Co-host of the Geomob podcast 
- Subscribe to my weekly “Maps in the Wild ” 
newsletter

> On 29 Aug 2023, at 20:00, discuss-requ...@lists.osgeo.org wrote:
> 
> Send Discuss mailing list submissions to
>   discuss@lists.osgeo.org 
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>   https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>   discuss-requ...@lists.osgeo.org 
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>   discuss-ow...@lists.osgeo.org 
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..."
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. UK aid worth nearly ?2.3 billion to India sparks heated
>  debate amid Chandrayaan-3 triumph (Suchith Anand)
> 
> From: Suchith Anand  >
> Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] UK aid worth nearly £2.3 billion to India sparks 
> heated debate amid Chandrayaan-3 triumph
> Date: 29 August 2023 at 13:41:38 BST
> To: "discuss@lists.osgeo.org " 
> mailto:discuss@lists.osgeo.org>>, GeoForAll 
> mailto:geofor...@lists.osgeo.org>>
> 
> 
> 
> Dear colleagues,
> 
> The definitive discovery of water on the Moon came in 2008, when Indian Space 
> Research Organization (ISRO)  launched the Chandrayaan-1 
>  spacecraft to lunar 
> orbit in October 22, 2008. Chandrayaan-1 carried with it a NASA-provided 
> science instrument called the Moon Mineralogical Mapper (M3) that observed 
> how the surface absorbed infrared light. Using this data M3 determined that 
> previously suspected water molecules were ice inside the Moon’s polar craters 
> . 
> Details at https://www.planetary.org/articles/water-on-the-moon-guide
> 
> On 23rd August 2023  ISRO’s Chandrayaan-3’s lander touched down on the lunar 
> surface, making India the first country to successfully land a spacecraft 
> near the Moon’s south pole. Scientists have deployed a rover to send images 
> and data back to Earth. This success belongs to all of humanity and it will 
> help moon missions by other countries in the future. 
> 
> India's space journey is an epic tale of ingenuity and resourcefulness. 
> Starting with a budget of less than $4M for its first satellite in 1975, ISRO 
> - Indian Space Research Organisation has made India a space power on a 
> shoestring budget, achieving monumental feats like landing near the Moon’s 
> south pole for around $70 Million.
> 
> But looks like some UK media are not happy with India’s success. The success 
> of India's Chandrayaan-3 mission to the Moon has ignited a debate over 
> foreign aid between the UK and India. 
> 
> “The debate took an intriguing turn when users cited a report published by 
> Columbia University Press, authored by economist Usha Patnaik. The report, 
> part of a collection of essays, revealed that the East India Company and the 
> British Raj had extracted a staggering £9.2 trillion (equivalent to $44.6 
> trillion) from India between 1765 and 1938. This eye-popping figure became a 
> focal point in the debate as X users humorously suggested that if the UK 
> sought returns, they should consider repaying the estimated $44.6 trillion 
> amassed during India’s Colonial rule.”
> 
> Read more at:
> UK aid worth nearly £2.3 billion to India sparks heated debate amid 
> Chandrayaan-3 triumph
> https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/new-updates/uk-aid-worth-2-3-billion-to-india-sparks-heated-debate-amid-chandrayaan-3-triumph/articleshow/103070330.cms?
> 
> How UK Media's 'Racist Rant' On Chandrayaan's Success Was Silenced By India's 
> '$45 Trillion' Truth
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NuD4BTcI6k
> 
> ISRO Chandrayaan-3 used British aid? British journalist 'insults' INDIA? GB 
> News | Karolina Goswami
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TrpetvaJv8
> 
> 
> This success of ISRO and Chandrayaan-3 will benefit the global scientific 
> community and it is great to see that countries from around the world  send 
> congratulations to India on this historic achievement. This is the year of 
> India’s G20 presidency. India’s idea of ‘One Earth, One Family, One Future’ 
> is resonating across the world. This human-centric approach has been welcomed 
> by all. India’s Moon mission

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Discuss Digest, Vol 187, Issue 13

2022-08-01 Thread Steven Feldman via Discuss 
Suchith

Lots of companies use the word “science” in their marketing, here are a few 
examples from a very quick search:
https://www.skinscience.uk 
https://www.foodscience.co.uk 
https://www.ministryofsupply.com 

It does not mean that they are claiming ownership of the whole domain of skin 
science or materials science.

The company you are probably referring to says on its website "Since 1969, we 
have supported customers with geographic science and geospatial analytics, what 
we call The Science of Where. We take a geographic approach to problem-solving, 
brought to life by modern GIS technology. We are committed to using science and 
technology to build a sustainable world.” It’s marketing blurb and it is 
effective but I cannot see what is unethical? 

After all it is not much more than a decade ago that academics started talking 
about GIS as Geographic Information Science, before that we all used the 
acronym for Geographic Information System. As for the use of the word where, 
that is a relatively new term in our sector (possible early usage by 
whereonearth.com ) and is not in my experience in 
common usage in the academic community.

Is your problem the use of the word “science" by a business or is it because 
the company is a proprietary software company or …?
__
Steven

Unusual maps in strange places -  mappery.org 

Subscribe to my weekly “Maps in the Wild ” newsletter

> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Fw: GIS Education (Suchith Anand)
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2022 16:56:06 +
> From: Suchith Anand 
> To: "discuss@lists.osgeo.org" , GeoForAll
>   
> Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] Fw: GIS Education
> Message-ID:
>   
> 
>   
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
> 
> For those interested in GeoEthics  can join the OGC GeoEthics maillist at 
> https://lists.opengeospatial.org/mailman/listinfo/geoethics
> 
> 
> Best wishes
> 
> 
> Suchith
> 
> 
> 
> From: GeoEthics  on behalf of Suchith Anand 
> via GeoEthics 
> Sent: 30 July 2022 08:25
> To: geoeth...@lists.opengeospatial.org 
> Subject: Re: [GeoEthics] GIS Education
> 
> 
> Dear colleagues,
> 
> 
> I received email from some colleagues requesting more information on the 
> Trademark of ?Science?. So for openness and transparency , I would like to 
> provide more information.
> 
> 
> I am not a native English speaker, so my apologies if anything got lost in 
> translation.  Please feel free to ask me if you need any further information.
> 
> 
> I am a Geographic Information Scientist. Geographic Information Science (GIS) 
> is my scientific discipline. I am now writing an article on Education which 
> is also looking into the Ethics of Digital Feudalism in GIS Education. I am 
> inviting advice and guidance from colleagues as I have many questions that I 
> do not know answers.  Hence I shared my ethical questions.
> 
> 
> 
> I came across  example of a vendor trademarking ?the Science of Where? in the 
> GIS/mapping domain and using this to promote their brand/products/services.
> 
> 
> https://trademarks.justia.com/871/92/the-science-of-87192660.html
> 
> 
> Is it Ethical to market/promote any vendor brand/products/services as ?the 
> Science ? of whichever area of study ? Is Science in that subject area   
> ?owned? by the Vendor who has trademark rights? For example if vendors start 
> trademarking and marketing their brand/products/services as ?The Science of 
> Climate Change? , ?The Science of Where? etc etc?  If so, what are the 
> implications for credibility of Science?
> 
> 
> 
> Are there any guidelines for  Scientific Associations (esp. if they are 
> members of the International Science Council ) for  taking sponsorship from 
> vendors who promote their   product/brand/services as  ?The Science of 
> ?whatever? topic !?
> 
> 
> I am a member of the GEO Data Ethics Working Group (The WG was  closed this 
> month by GEO Secretariat due to ?resource constraints? ) where I have been 
> raising the issue of vendor sponsorship for Group on Earth Observations (GEO) 
> conferences, projects etc and the need to have clear guidelines.
> 
> 
> 
> I will appreciate advice and guidance from colleagues on this. Thanks.
> 
> 
> Best wishes
> 
> 
> Suchith
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Suchith Anand 
> Sent: 26 July 2022 17:34
> To: geoeth...@lists.opengeospatial.org 
> Subject: GIS Education
> 
> Dear colleagues
> 
> 
> I am now writing an article on GIS Education and I will appreciate your 
> advice and guidance.
> 
> 
> Is it ethical for GIS Vendors (Vendor X or Y , it doesn?t matter)   to 
> trademark/sales/market their products/brand/services as ?the science?? It 
> might be a profit /sales/marketing strategy

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [OSGeo-Conf] Poll: Change FOSS4G structure to have some continuity of organization and management

2022-02-04 Thread Steven Feldman via Discuss 
+2 from me

Everyone is welcome to participate in the conversation about changes to the 
organisation of FOSS4G, then the Conference Ctee should vote and make a 
recommendation (or recommendations) to the Board and the Board should decide.

Our organisational model is that the charter members elect the board and the 
board then makes decisions on their behalf, if CM’s don’t agree with board 
decisions they have the option to vote in a new board, we do not have a direct 
voting or referendum system where CM’s are consulted on individual decisions.
__
Steven

Unusual maps in strange places -  mappery.org 

Subscribe to my weekly “Maps in the Wild ” newsletter

> On 4 Feb 2022, at 09:01, Jeroen Ticheler  wrote:
> 
> Hi Maxi,
> Thanks! I completely agree with those type of changes indeed. It makes sense 
> we have a list of scenario’s forward and have a vote on that by the 
> community. 
> 
> For what the membership of the conference committee is concerned, I left 
> simply because of the supposed/imposed barrier of not having been a 
> conference chair, although I didn’t agree with that at all. Didn’t feel like 
> fighting over it though. It would be better to make membership voluntary just 
> like other committees. Possibly approved by the board or charter members. 
> 
> Cheers,
> Jeroen
> 
>  
> Jeroen Ticheler
> Mobile: +31681286572
> E-mail: jeroen.tiche...@geocat.net 
> https://www.geocat.net 
> Veenderweg 13
> 6721 WD Bennekom
> The Netherlands
> Tel: +31318416664
> On 4 Feb 2022, 09:02 +0100, Massimiliano Cannata 
> , wrote:
>> Dear Jeroen,
>> Thanks for your considerations.
>> 
>> I wasn't proposing to extend the evaluation of proposals to the whole 
>> community. I understand a dedicated committee should do this (even though I 
>> believe a part of the evaluation of a proposal could be assigned by votes of 
>> the community, maybe 10%?).
>> 
>> My point is that decisions of changing the organisation of the FOSS4G cannot 
>> be done without the involvement of the whole community. It's not about 
>> changing the evaluation process, it's about deciding for example to have a 
>> fixed location, to completely leave it to an external company, to pay the 
>> committee members to do it, to have it online or in person, to cancel the 
>> global and keep only to local conference...
>> 
>> Another point is that so far there's the assumption that only organizer of 
>> previous FOSS4G have the competence to understand technical matters. That's 
>> quite aleatory and in no other committee there is such an entry barrier... 
>> If you didn't play in NBA you cannot be a good coach? Can a government 
>> self-elect his members? What about innovation, new ideas and other 
>> experiences, or we're just close in our FOSS4G past events experience... 
>> Because only if you run a global conference you have the competence...
>> 
>> Sorry to be long, and this is not personal at all, I just like being 
>> inclusive and have empowered participatory approach..
>> 
>> All the best,
>> Maxi
>> 
>> Il gio 3 feb 2022, 17:04 Jeroen Ticheler > > ha scritto:
>> Hi Maxi,
>> Thanks for sharing your view on this. Although I sympathize with the idea of 
>> a whole community having a say in how conference locations is selected and 
>> organized, I’m not in favor of the process you propose. Reading LOI’s and 
>> full proposals takes a lot of time and voting a lot of thought and 
>> discussion. It really helps to have previous conference organizers on the 
>> committee as well. At the same time I also think the committee should be 
>> open to other members (I used to be a member long time ago while I never 
>> chaired a conference, and I don’t think that mattered honestly). 
>> Concluding, I think selecting a conference / proposal should be taken care 
>> of by the committee, not by all charter members or the whole community. 
>> Maybe the board or the charter members should decide for an elected 
>> committee similar to what we already do with the board elections. 
>> Cheers,
>> Jeroen
>> 
>>  
>> Jeroen Ticheler
>> Mobile: +31681286572
>> E-mail: jeroen.tiche...@geocat.net 
>> https://www.geocat.net 
>> Veenderweg 13
>> 6721 WD Bennekom
>> The Netherlands
>> Tel: +31318416664
>> On 3 Feb 2022, 16:15 +0100, Massimiliano Cannata 
>> mailto:massimiliano.cann...@supsi.ch>>, 
>> wrote:
>>> Dear conference community,
>>> why is the community left out from this decision / discussion?
>>> 
>>> The FOSS4G conference is a property of OSGeo, and therefore of the 
>>> community as a whole.
>>> The conference committee has not been elected so cannot decide in 
>>> representation of the community.
>>> 
>>> As an OPEN community I strongly believe that all the charter members (at 
>>> least) should have

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [OSGeo-Conf] Conference selection transparency (Was Announcement: Call for Location global FOSS4G 2023)

2022-01-13 Thread Steven Feldman via Discuss 
I have been on conference committee for almost a decade, I can’t recall us ever 
having more than 4 proposals for the global FOSS4G. Each year there are 
different factors that influence our choices, I don’t recall a year when there 
was much doubt about who we should select. A predetermined marking system would 
not make our job any easier it would just lead to endless debate about the 
relative weighting of each of the factors
__
Steven

Unusual maps in strange places -  mappery.org 

Subscribe to my weekly “Maps in the Wild ” newsletter

> On 13 Jan 2022, at 15:22, María Arias de Reyna  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 1:13 PM Jonathan Moules via Discuss
>  wrote:
>> I don't think there's any need to reinvent the wheel here; a number of 
>> open-source initiatives seem to use scoring for evaluating proposals. 
>> Chances are something from one of them can be borrowed.
>> 
>> Apache use it for scoring mentee proposals for GSOC: 
>> https://community.apache.org/mentee-ranking-process.html
>> 
>> Linux Foundation scores their conference proposals for example: 
>> https://events.linuxfoundation.org/kubecon-cloudnativecon-europe/program/scoring-guidelines/
> 
> Am I understanding it wrong or this is to accept talk proposals, not
> conference proposals?
> 
> Scoring a contractor for a well defined project (as you pointed public
> administrations do), choosing the right person for a specified job, or
> deciding if a talk deserves to be in a schedule is more or less "easy"
> compared to decide who is hosting a conference.
> 
> If you want to propose a draft of score requirements for FOSS4G, I
> think it would be interesting to go through them and try to come up
> with something. Even if the scoring is not binding, it may help future
> proposals see what is the path.
> 
> My only "but" with this system (which I use almost always when I have
> to review anything and I intended to use for this FOSS4G voting) is
> that it is hard to come up with an objective system that counts all
> the variables. And if the score does not match the final decision, it
> may be difficult to process.
> 
> I have been on the GSoC as mentor with the ASF and true, we have a
> ranking process, but it helped us mostly to order the candidates and
> reject those that deviate too much. The final decision was not a clear
> numeric decision. When the difference is small, you do have to
> consider other things. And from what I have seen these past few years
> on FOSS4G, either there is one candidate that outshines obviously, or
> the difference is really small between candidates and it comes down to
> things that may not be even defined on the RFP.
> 
> And there's things you have to consider that a generic scoring system
> can't help you with. We used this system in FOSS4G 2021 to decide
> which talks to accept on the conference, where the community voting
> had a strong weight but was not binding. And we had to make some
> exceptions with good talks that were experimental but didn't get a
> good score and objectively numerically they were rejected. We also had
> to reject some duplicated talks that had a high score but we couldn't
> argue both were accepted. Which one to reject? Usually the one that
> had a speaker with more talks. But what if both have a speaker with no
> more talks? That's something you have to check case by case.
> 
> Which leads us that with the scoring there is less room for
> experimentation because the candidates will focus on getting high
> scores on specific questions. Not on offering what is their best. For
> example, the proposal we made for FOSS4G Sevilla 2019 in a pirate
> amusement park to celebrate Magallanes... no score could have
> predicted that.
> 
> So I may agree on scoring, not on binding scoring.
> 
> But first we need some draft to work on to score proposals :)
> ___
> Conference_dev mailing list
> conference_...@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev

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