[OSGeo-Conf] Committee Meeting to discuss 2008 RFP

[Jeff McKenna]

Frank Warmerdam wrote:
> A few notes:
> 
>  o Do you really have a working osgeo.org email?  Cool

yes


> 
>  o Do we really aim to be *the* geospatial conference of the year?

Um, if this statement is a problem please suggest an alternative.

> 
>  o "promote open geospatial technologies" should be "promote open source
>    geospatial technologies".

updated.

> 
>  o I think "OSGeo may also be in a position to provide some bridge funding
>    and take on liability for conference shortfalls" to "OSGeo will take
>    on financial responsibility, including bridge funding and absorbing
>    shortfalls".  We don't need to keep people guessing on this point.

updated.

>  o I think we could change "Respondents are not required to provide
>    detailed financial details at this stage, but we need enough
>    sense of facility costs to rough out expected attendee costs." to
>    something like:
> 
>      "Respondents are not required to provide detailed financial
>       details at this stage, but we need enough sense of facility,
>       and service costs to rough out expected attendee costs.  The
>       more financial detail available the better."

updated.  I also replaced "rough out" with "estimate"

>  o The budget template download link in the document points to
>    test.osgeo.net.

Tyler and I are working on this filemanager stuff now.

> 
>  o I'd suggest changing "OSGeo conference committee members will order
>    the proposals from best to worst. No weighting will be assigned to
>    the evaluation criteria, so therefore each criteria should be treated
>    as equal in value." to something like:
> 
>       "OSGeo conference committee members will order the proposals from
>        best to worst based on their subjective judgement of the proposal.
>        The evaluation criteria have no fixed weighting and are used as
>        a general guide."

Paul also submitted changes for this part, so here is a combination of both:

"OSGeo conference committee members will individually order the 
proposals from best to worst based on their subjective judgement of the 
proposal.  The final selection will be determined by aggregating the 
individual orderings.  The evaluation criteria have no fixed weighting 
and are used as a general guide."

> 
>  o I'm not convinced that the FOSSGIS report is that helpful as guidance
>    for future FOSS4G proposals since (in my opinion) it was a rather
>    different sort of conference.

Possibly.  But I prefer to leave it in for the chance that some part of 
that conference organizing might be helpful for future FOSS4G organizers.

*****

Both your's and Paul's changes are in the latest document 
(http://www.osgeo.org/conference/rfp)

jeff