<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>Apology for the flaming arrows. Howard and I love to throw arrows at each other.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>Oh where do I start here?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>From an idealist standpoint. Yes I am crazy enough to think I can make a difference and provide something complementary to travis and appveyor.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>I do not think they satisfy all needs without going thru some crazy hoops.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>As strk mention gitlab is an alternative , though you may not be interested in it.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>From a pragmatic standpoint I think "why are we sanctioning spending $5000/yr in the name of OSGeo projects on something that people need to be under OSGeo github to take advantage of?".<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>First of all if this is something GDAL needs and Proj needs, then it should come out of GDAL's/ Proj's budget </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Wingdings;color:#1F497D'>J</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>So if Even were to say hay GDAL needs $5000/year for this thing, then by all means yes we should give it to him and he should put it in his budget.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>GDAL deserves that much per year. Same with Proj.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>But don't make it a "OSGeo Projects" need this. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>I don't need it I don't want it, and I don't see the point of having an OSGeo GitHub org that doesn't even reflect all our projects.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>It still stands that this would be a non-issue if you guys didn't create a skeletal OSGeo github group where GDAL and proj.4 are the projects eating up all the workers.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>If you each had your own project group on github you'd each have 5 workers end of story. You wouldn't even need to waste funding on this. </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Wingdings;color:#1F497D'>J</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>You'd also have more room to breathe as you can create many github subprojects as QGIS has done and not crowd everyone else out </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Wingdings;color:#1F497D'>J</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><a href="https://github.com/QGIS">https://github.com/QGIS</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>When people go to github to look for GDAL or proj.4 they could care less you are an OSGeo project. They already know YOU and are looking for YOU.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>If someone goes to <a href="https://github.com/OSGEO">https://github.com/OSGEO</a> they think - so these are all the projects OSGeo has – NOOOO. It's NEGATIVE advertising.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>So both my idealistic and pragmatic sides are disappointed by this movement to grow the github OSGeo Org for no benefit.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>Thanks,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>Regina<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> Howard Butler [mailto:howard@hobu.co] <br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, April 23, 2018 1:04 PM<br><b>To:</b> Regina Obe <lr@pcorp.us><br><b>Cc:</b> Tim Sutton <tim@kartoza.com>; Jeffrey Johnson <ortelius@gmail.com>; osgeo-board List <board@lists.osgeo.org>; Sandro Santilli <strk@kbt.io><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Board] Travis-CI & OSGeo<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>On Apr 23, 2018, at 9:50 AM, Regina Obe <<a href="mailto:lr@pcorp.us">lr@pcorp.us</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>My issue is not that Even shouldn't be given the freedom to manage his project the way he wants. Of course he should.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>Yes it is. You're arguing that you can spend $5000 on something more worthy than supporting GDAL with the project infrastructure it wants to maintain under OSGeo's umbrella.<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>The point is that<span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div style='margin-left:.5in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.25in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>1)</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt;color:#1F497D'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>He is limited because he is under the OSGEO Project infrastructure on Github. If he were on his own project space, like PostGIS or QGIS (or Geos used to be), he wouldn't be limited by the 5 worker limit. I fail to see what benefit this Org is doing us when several of aour key projects aren't even on it (e.g. QGIS, GRASS, PostGIS) and even if they are what is the point, people should be lured to the osgeo website, not github.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>This is a really good point. Why should projects that are to be on their own for infrastructure and support bother with putting anything under an OSGeo umbrella at all?<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>Or in a less snarky tone, OSGeo needs to decide if supporting projects with infrastructure is part of its mission. Member projects have no budgetary power to put resources into infrastructure capabilities that work for them of their choice, and there's a SAC beast that must be fed with money and take on new projects to continue to have relevance. Many projects actively avoid SAC and OSGeo resources because it is lesser quality infrastructure. It is lesser quality infrastructure because it is really damn hard to be all things to everybody. Add the fact that SAC is almost entirely unrecognized volunteer effort, and it is very difficult to succeed long term with any kind of staying power. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>GitHub, Travis, and AppVeyor are products. They cost money. They are specialized tools. They work really well. They have organizations behind them. They didn't exist in 2006 when OSGeo was formed, so we started down the path of building our own. If we started in 2018, I'm unconvinced we would have built our own.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div style='margin-left:.5in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.25in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>3)</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt;color:#1F497D'> <span class=apple-converted-space> </span></span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>I think with $5000, that's almost the size of the osgeo budget for hardware. I think of all the good we could do with $5000/yr and something that could help all projects not just things hosted on GitHub.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>Infrastructure is *so* much more than a piece of hardware in a subsidized data center that graciously hosts us.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'> </span><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div style='margin-left:.5in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>Like building up our own CI infrastructure that would test more than just Ubuntu.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>You can use Docker with Travis to test whatever flavor you want.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div style='margin-left:.5in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'>And what about AppVeryor. How much are you going to have to pay for that? Is it under the same core limitations or will you have to shell out an additional $5000/yr for that?</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>Yes, I would hope so. Sandro is very vocal about his disdain for Windows, so I'm sure he will complain, but you've made good business supporting windows prisoners, so maybe you won't. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>Is OSGeo a software foundation that supports projects that make software, or is it an advocacy organization for users looking to get leverage off of free and open source software? The balance has been wildly tipped toward the latter the past 5 years... The board needs to clearly signal OSGeo's relationship to its member projects in this regard. I hope the board can ignore the flaming arrows Regina and I are shooting at each other in a battle that will never end and make a decision about OSGeo's relationship to its member projects and their infrastructure. If the relationship is "you must use SAC stuff", then the board needs to dump significantly more resources into burnishing that infrastructure to an outcome that might still be unsatisfactory. If the relationship is "use whatever you want and pay for it yourself", projects with the wherewithal to do so are going to do it outside of an organization that frankly isn't providing them with anything. If the relationship is "incubated projects get XXX dollars of infrastructure funding to spend on tools of its choosing", maybe this acts as both an incentive to incubate and a ring to reach for.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>What we have now, where the answer is "volunteer your volunteers' time to build infrastructure within SAC" is not the solution.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'>Howard<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><br><br><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>