[Board] [geoforall-ab] IMPORTANT - feedback and vote will be needed: geo4all relationship

Thu Nov 26 11:26:04 PST 2015

I would assume we have one, that votes once a year to continue to
participate in Geo4All.

I am more concerned about the impression that we are limited to OSGeo
projects, which I hope has been addressed in this email thread. (It is a
bit hard to communicate on your cross-email thread as each email list will
only get half the communication - so I am not sure how much of the message
is getting through).

--
Jody Garnett

On 26 November 2015 at 03:36, Arnulf Christl <arnulf.christl at metaspatial.net
> wrote:

> Dear OSGeo Board,
> if OSGeo does not manage to reactivate/reinvigorate the Education
> Committee, then we will not have one. OSGeo is a do-ocracy, right? This
> is how OSGeo functions. Forcing something in place just because will
> probably not work.
>
> In my opinion we should let Geo4All go where it wants to go, otherwise
> chances are high we restrict it's potential. At the same time I am
> absolutely sure that Geo4All will continue to focus on good, solid Open
> Source software as we promote it through OSGeo. If Geo4All were
> something that emerged "outside" of OSGeo then I would absolutely push
> for joining and supporting the initiative. Does this make any sense?
>
>
> Geo4All Advisory Board,
> I would like to keep the close bounds to OSGeo - simply because it is
> the Open Source compass for geospatial Open Source and therefore the
> natural place to go to for selecting best practice technology for
> education.
>
> Wrt. to the lab name "Geo4All Partners" sounds like a good middle path.
> I would refrain from externalizing Geo4All as a separate legal entity.
> This will only eat up resources and divert energy from what we want to
> achieve. Maybe at a later stage (and with too much funding coming in)
> this may make sense, right now I do not really see the need (or funding
> or volunteers).
>
> Having responsible and thoroughly "Open Source" educated people act as
> OSGeo liaison officer totally makes sense (as suggested Venka, Helena).
>
> Which option does this best map to? Not sure, seems like 2 would make
> more sense? I do believe that option 1 and 1b look like OSGeo is trying
> to "grab a hold of" Geo4All. Instead I would like to see us "let go of
> it" and at the same time have the confidence that it will always stick
> with OSGeo's mission, because there is solid involvement from OSGeo
> folks and simply because our Open Source software is the core asset for
> the labs.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Arnulf
>
> On 18.11.2015 08:01, Suchith Anand wrote:
> > Thanks Jeff, Charlie, Venka, Jeroen for your inputs and ideas. I am sure
> > with the combined wisdom of everyone , we will find the best solution.
> > As Charlie said we can keep promoting OSGeo and all OSGeo official
> > projects and keep  partnership with educational (and research) efforts
> > with other open projects (who might one day join OSGeo). We need to keep
> > doors of collaborations open as it is key for growth.
> >
> > Building Bridges (the theme of FOSS4G Bonn) is very appropriate and also
> > good point to think for next stage (10th Anniversary) of OSGeo's growth.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> >
> > Suchith
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > *From:* GeoForAll-ab [geoforall-ab-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] on behalf of
> > Jeroen Ticheler [jeroen.ticheler at geocat.net]
> > *Sent:* Wednesday, November 18, 2015 6:47 AM
> > *To:* GeoForAll-ab at lists.osgeo.org
> > *Subject:* Re: [geoforall-ab] IMPORTANT - feedback and vote will be
> > needed: [Board] geo4all relationship
> >
> > Hi all,
> > I prefer option 1 as it seems to be the logical next step. However I
> > would suggest the OSGeo board to not force a big process of change onto
> > the geo4all committee. This transition could go step by step. Options 1B
> > and 2 are not optimal I think.
> > Greeting,
> > Jeroen
> >
> >
> > Op 18 nov. 2015 om 02:11 heeft Venkatesh Raghavan
> > <raghavan at media.osaka-cu.ac.jp <mailto:raghavan at media.osaka-cu.ac.jp>>
> > het volgende geschreven:
> >
> >> I prefer  Scenario 1 as it reflects more closely to the information
> >> presently available
> >> on the OSGeo Website. I think Scenario 1 is less confusion as it also
> >> clarifies the status
> >> of former Edu Committee.
> >>
> >> Best
> >>
> >> Venka
> >>
> >> On 2015/11/18 6:17, Charles Schweik wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> I think I'd like to hear the opinions of others.
> >>>
> >>> I lean toward 1b and want to keep rules 'lean'. I want to promote
> OSGeo and
> >>> OSGeo official projects, but I also want to make sure we keep strong
> >>> partnership with educational (and research) efforts with other projects
> >>> like NASA WorldWind.
> >>>
> >>> But I don't want rules around organization hinder good strong open
> >>> geospatial science and education collaboration.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Charlie
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Jeff McKenna <
> jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>> Hi Suchith,
> >>>>
> >>>> I actually wrote option 1b, so I can tell you that this option only
> works
> >>>> if the entire GeoForAll initiative agrees to focus on OSGeo as its
> >>>> education committee.  This document was drafted because it seems that
> >>>> GeoForAll, as great as the initiative is for education, may not
> always have
> >>>> OSGeo in their interests (as many GeoForAll members have stated
> recently,
> >>>> that they should not be forced to promote OSGeo, they should have a
> >>>> choice).  Well, this document was created because OSGeo really needs a
> >>>> committee/existing initiative to always promote OSGeo.  So option1b
> can
> >>>> only work if the entire GeoForAll initiative agrees to always promote
> >>>> OSGeo, as its education "arm" of the foundation.
> >>>>
> >>>> So before you overwhelmingly choose option 1b, please realize that
> this
> >>>> would mean that GeoForAll would be responsible for always promoting
> OSGeo.
> >>>>
> >>>> So maybe GeoForAll needs to debate what is actually its focus, is it
> >>>> OSGeo, or, is it in fact nothing to do with OSGeo, because it promotes
> >>>> "open" through many different tools and organizations.
> >>>>
> >>>> Personally, I want Option 1b, but at the same time, I also want
> GeoForAll
> >>>> to realize that the OSGeo foundation needs a
> committee/group/initiative to
> >>>> always be out there promoting OSGeo.  If this is a problem, then
> Option 1b
> >>>> unfortunately will not work.
> >>>>
> >>>> I hope this explanation helps.
> >>>>
> >>>> -jeff
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 2015-11-17 4:34 PM, Suchith Anand wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hi Phillip,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes, if Option 1b gets more votes, then  in this scenario Geo4All
> would
> >>>>> be required to name an officer who would liaise with the OSGeo Board
> (as
> >>>>> every other OSGeo committee does). Then my suggestion is that
> someone who
> >>>>> is an OSGeo Board member (Venka or Helena) is nominated for this
> role.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best wishes,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Suchith
> >>>>> ________________________________________
> >>>>> From: Phillip Davis [pdavis at delmar.edu]
> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 8:02 PM
> >>>>> To: Suchith Anand; Helena Mitasova; GeoForAll-ab at lists.osgeo.org
> >>>>> Subject: RE: IMPORTANT - feedback and vote will be needed: [Board]
> >>>>> geo4all relationship
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Looks like 1a provides easiest implementation path and keeps
> GeoForAll
> >>>>> unique identity.  Option 1b provides more autonomy for GeoForAll,
> but the
> >>>>> requirement for an officer is somewhat problematic, since that would
> be
> >>>>> more or less permanent and might entail much footwork?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> My vote is 1a.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Dr. Phillip Davis
> >>>>> Director GeoAcademy (http://fossgeo.org)
> >>>>> Professor: Del Mar College Department of Computer
> >>>>> Science-Engineering-Advanced Technology
> >>>>> Program Lead: Geographic Information System & Cartography -
> Geospatial
> >>>>> Technology Program
> >>>>> 101 Baldwin, VB 153 | Corpus Christi, TX 78404
> >>>>> 361.698.1476 | 361.698.1475 | 361.698.1479 fax
> >>>>> pdavis at delmar.edu
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ALL THESE WORLDS…ARE YOURS…EXCEPT TEXAS…ATTEMPT NO LANDING THERE
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>>> From: GeoForAll-ab [mailto:geoforall-ab-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On
> >>>>> Behalf Of Suchith Anand
> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 1:05 PM
> >>>>> To: Helena Mitasova; GeoForAll-ab at lists.osgeo.org
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [geoforall-ab] IMPORTANT - feedback and vote will be
> needed:
> >>>>> [Board] geo4all relationship
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks Helena. Please all AB members provide feedback and vote on
> their
> >>>>> choice of scenario by 30th Nov 2015.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Also Regional Chairs please inform your views on  Regional chairs
> being
> >>>>> constituted within the OSGeo Foundation structure if there is a
> majority
> >>>>> vote for Scenario 1? Yes/No
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best wishes,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Suchith
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ________________________________________
> >>>>> From: Helena Mitasova [hmitaso at ncsu.edu]
> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 2:41 PM
> >>>>> To: GeoForAll-ab at lists.osgeo.org
> >>>>> Cc: Suchith Anand
> >>>>> Subject: IMPORTANT - feedback and vote will be needed: [Board]
> geo4all
> >>>>> relationship
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Suchith,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> thanks for presenting the GeoForAll OSGeo Relationship <
> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GeoForAll_OSGeo_Relationship> document to
> >>>>> the community.
> >>>>> I noticed that the link to the actual document was somewhat burried
> in
> >>>>> the forwarded email where it could be overlooked. I am resending it
> at
> >>>>> least for the advisory board because after discussion a decision and
> vote
> >>>>> on one of the options (perhaps with some revisions) will be needed.
> >>>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GeoForAll_OSGeo_Relationship
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Helena
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Nov 17, 2015, at 7:19 AM, Suchith Anand <
> >>>>>> Suchith.Anand at nottingham.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks Jody . I have added more details into the wiki and
> forwarding to
> >>>>>> Geo4All advisory Board and community.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Dear Geo4All Advisory Board and Regional chairs,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Recently there had been  discussions on the future directions for
> >>>>>> Geo4All  .There were different opinions and hence we arranged a
> meeting at
> >>>>>> Como to discuss this and find a way forward. Following lot of
> discussions
> >>>>>> among our members in our mail lists  etc and the meeting at Como[1]
> that
> >>>>>> was led by Charlie Schweik ,the consensus was that OSGeo Education
> and
> >>>>>> Curriculum Committee and GeoForAll are the same and it is now
> GeoForAll:
> >>>>>> OSGeo's Education and Curriculum Effort as reflected in OSGeo
> website at
> >>>>>> http://www.osgeo.org/education . Venka has also presented this
> outcomes
> >>>>>> at FOSS4G Seoul [2]. Geo4All will continue to be inclusive and
> include all
> >>>>>> partners that OSGeo Board have MOUs with for expanding this OSGeo'
> Geo4All
> >>>>>> education initiative and warmly welcome everyone who are following
> the
> >>>>>> principles.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Geo4All initiative was started with the key aim to build up OSGeo's
> >>>>>> education aims by collaborating with like minded organisations and
> it is
> >>>>>> one of the most successful initiatives that we have undertaken.
> OSGeo Board
> >>>>>> has made separate MoUs with both ICA and ISPRS for expanding
> Geo4All and
> >>>>>> universities,SMEs, government organisations etc worldwide have
> trusted the
> >>>>>> MoUs that OSGeo provided and setup labs and joined the network , so
> it is
> >>>>>> important we provide strong continuity and focus. MoUs have to be
> respected
> >>>>>> and the momentum created need to build upon with clear direction
> and focus.
> >>>>>> It is important that proper structures are in place and steps need
> to be
> >>>>>> taken to ensure the smooth transition to GeoForAll as OSGeo's
> Education and
> >>>>>> keep collaborating with ICA, ISPRS and other organisations that
> OSGeo has
> >>>>>> MoU with. This will also make sure the efforts put in by lot of
> volunteers
> >>>>>> for this is build upon for the future.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Geo4All had been working hard to expand OSGeo education activities
> >>>>>> globally .Members have been running courses,training
> events,workshops
> >>>>>> using OSGeo software, MOOC programs (that benefitted thousands of
> students
> >>>>>> globally) etc have raised OSGeo education efforts globally. Geo4All
> members
> >>>>>> have been actively contributing to OSGeo Curriculum development
> effort and
> >>>>>> will continue to expand this by having more course materials in
> various
> >>>>>> OSGeo software added to the OSGeo education repository for everyone
> to make
> >>>>>> use of for their teaching and education.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We will welcome and include all partners that OSGeo Board have MOUs
> with
> >>>>>> for expanding this OSGeo' Geo4All education initiative and warmly
> welcome
> >>>>>> everyone who are following the principles. That way the OSGeo Board
> will be
> >>>>>> able to keep expanding the initiative and to make MoUs with other
> >>>>>> organisations etc as we are doing now (ICA, ISPRS) and also in
> future .
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So steps need to be taken to ensure the smooth transition to
> GeoForAll
> >>>>>> as OSGeo's Education and keep collaborating with ICA, ISPRS and
> other
> >>>>>> organisations that OSGeo has MoU with. This will also make sure the
> efforts
> >>>>>> put in by lot of  volunteers for this is build upon for the future.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> There are some steps that are outlined below and looking through the
> >>>>>> options - Scenario 1 seems to  be best option based on the Como
> discussions
> >>>>>> for ensure the smooth transition to GeoForAll as OSGeo's Education
> and keep
> >>>>>> collaborating with ICA, ISPRS and other organisations that OSGeo
> has MoU
> >>>>>> with.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> In this case, the Geo4All Advisory Board would include
> representatives
> >>>>>> from our partners like ICA, ISPRS etc. Geo4All Advisory Board
> comprises of
> >>>>>> representatives from ICA, ISPRS, OSGeo and other organisations that
> join in
> >>>>>> future. As a partner in the Geo4All initiative, a Project Steering
> >>>>>> Committee (PSC) comprising of VP OSGeo Foundation (Education and
> Curriculum
> >>>>>> Project) and other representatives (e.g Regional Chairs of Geo4All)
> need to
> >>>>>> be constituted within the OSGeo Foundation. The PSC could liaise
> with
> >>>>>> Geo4All Advisory Board to evolve way and means to achieve mutual
> goals and
> >>>>>> objectives.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Charlie Schweik as VP OSGeo Foundation (Education and Curriculum
> >>>>>> Project) and other representatives (e.g Regional Chairs of
> Geo4All)  please
> >>>>>> let us know if you are happy to being  constituted within the OSGeo
> >>>>>> Foundation structure?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> May i request all AB members and Regional Chairs to also send their
> >>>>>> suggestions on this, so we can  move forward. It is important that
> proper
> >>>>>> structures are in place and steps need to be taken to ensure the
> smooth
> >>>>>> transition to GeoForAll as OSGeo's Education and keep collaborating
> with
> >>>>>> ICA, ISPRS and other organisations that OSGeo has MoU with. This
> will also
> >>>>>> make sure the efforts put in by lot of  volunteers for this is
> build upon
> >>>>>> for the future.Please send your inputs before 30th Nov 2015 .Thanks.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Best wishes,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Suchith
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [1]
> >>>>>>
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_EU_Como_2015_Preconference_meeting
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [2] http://www.slideshare.net/VenkateshRaghavan1/g4-a-newver2
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> From: Board [board-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] on behalf of Jody
> Garnett
> >>>>>> [jody.garnett at gmail.com]
> >>>>>> Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 4:25 PM
> >>>>>> To: board at lists.osgeo.org
> >>>>>> Subject: [Board] geo4all relationship
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I have added an entry to our wiki for:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Revised Education Committee mandate pending clarification of
> GeoForAll
> >>>>>> OSGeo Relationship with Geo4All advisory board
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Venkatesh Raghavan and Jeff McKenna are our representatives on the
> >>>>>> GeoForAll advisory board.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thank you for taking taking on what is an important relationship
> for our
> >>>>>> foundation objectives.
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Jody Garnett
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 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 send it back to me, and immediately delete
> it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in
> this
> >>>>>> message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by
> the
> >>>>>> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> >>>>>> University of Nottingham.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> >>>>>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage
> your
> >>>>>> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> >>>>>> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> >>>>>> permitted by UK legislation.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> ica-osgeo-labs mailing list
> >>>>>> ica-osgeo-labs at lists.osgeo.org
> >>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ica-osgeo-labs
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Helena Mitasova
> >>>>> Professor at the Department of Marine,
> >>>>> Earth, and Atmospheric Sciences
> >>>>> and Center for Geospatial Analytics
> >>>>> North Carolina State University
> >>>>> Raleigh, NC 27695-8208
> >>>>> hmitaso at ncsu.edu
> >>>>> http://geospatial.ncsu.edu/osgeorel/publications.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "All electronic mail messages in connection with State business
> which are
> >>>>> sent to or received by this account are subject to the NC Public
> Records
> >>>>> Law and may be disclosed to third parties.”
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 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 send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> >>>>> message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
> >>>>> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> University
> >>>>> of Nottingham.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> >>>>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> >>>>> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> >>>>> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> >>>>> permitted by UK legislation.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> GeoForAll-ab mailing list
> >>>>> GeoForAll-ab at lists.osgeo.org
> >>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall-ab
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Confidentiality Notice:  The information contained in this email,
> >>>>> including attachments, may be
> >>>>> privileged, proprietary, and/or confidential as provided by law.  The
> >>>>> information in this email is intended
> >>>>> only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is
> addressed.  If
> >>>>> you have received this
> >>>>> communication in error, please notify the sender by replying to the
> email
> >>>>> message and immediately
> >>>>> return the email, attachments, and any and all copies to the
> sender.  If
> >>>>> you are not the intended recipient
> >>>>> of this email and received it in error, please be advised that you
> may be
> >>>>> subject to civil liability for any
> >>>>> use of privileged, proprietary, and/or confidential information
> contained
> >>>>> herein.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 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 send it back to me, and immediately delete
> it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> >>>>> message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
> >>>>> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> >>>>> University of Nottingham.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> >>>>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> >>>>> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> >>>>> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> >>>>> permitted by UK legislation.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> GeoForAll-ab mailing list
> >>>> GeoForAll-ab at lists.osgeo.org
> >>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall-ab
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> GeoForAll-ab mailing list
> >>> GeoForAll-ab at lists.osgeo.org
> >>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall-ab
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> GeoForAll-ab mailing list
> >> GeoForAll-ab at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:GeoForAll-ab at lists.osgeo.org>
> >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall-ab
> >
> >
> > 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 send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
> >
> > Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> > message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
> > author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> > University of Nottingham.
> >
> > This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> > attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> > computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> > communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> > permitted by UK legislation.
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GeoForAll-ab mailing list
> > GeoForAll-ab at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall-ab
> >
>
> --
> http://metaspatial.net
> Spatially enabling your business.
> _______________________________________________
> Board mailing list
> Board at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/attachments/20151126/1fa910fe/attachment.htm>