[OSGeo-Conf] [Board] Proposed text for an OSGeo Code of Conduct

Mon Feb 9 06:02:53 PST 2015

I agree with this statement and would be interested to hear how this
conversation is moving forward.

Thanks,
Camille

Camille E. Acey

Manager, Customer Development and Partnerships| Boundless

camille at boundlessgeo.com

T: +1 917.460.7197|M: +1 347.267.2016| Skype: camilleacey

New York, NY - USA

@boundlessgeo

<https://twitter.com/boundlessgeo>

<https://twitter.com/boundlessgeo>

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Jeff, all,
>
> Thanks for invitation to the board meeting [1] to discuss a code of
> conduct. Unfortunately I can't make it, my enthusiasm for OSGeo wains at
> 2am (which is the timeslot for me). Maybe there are others who have been
> involved in the conference email list discuss who will join in.
>
> So I'll add my comments in advance:
>
> 1. I strongly believe there should be ONLY ONE OSGeo endorsed and
> recommended Code of Conduct / Diversity Statement. It makes it simpler and
> hence easier to apply.
>
> 2. Following on from 1), other OSGeo communities should be invited to
> contribute to the Code of Conduct / Diversity Statement. In particular, the
> conference committee should be invited to contribute.
>
> 4. I suggest building on prior best practice documentation rather than
> writing our own from scratch. Many of these prior documents have already
> gone through multiple review cycles and it makes sense to build upon that
> expertise. There have been a number of referenced best practice documents
> referenced. Carl has just suggested an OGC reference which is good (and
> built upon prior material).
>
> 6. There has been valuable and insightful suggestions on this topic
> already on the conference thread. I suggest building upon those comments as
> well.
>
> 5. David William Bitner valuably suggested documenting what we want to
> achieve, then use that as a basis for writing. (see comment below). I
> suggest what we want such a document to cover:
>
> * Recognise that OSGeo has a DIVERSE community
> * Set expectation that people should act RESPECTFULLY toward each other
> * Outline a process for RECOGNISING, REPORTING and ADDRESSING incidents
> which can be referenced by those dealing with incidents. (Dealing with
> incidents is often a hostile situation, and having a process to reference
> can greatly help the people doing the hard job of mediating.)
>
> 6. While I like the concept of the word "Diversity", I think it is
> currently confusing in  "Diversity Statement" as a heading. "Diversity" is
> broad in meaning, and can mean Diversity in software choice, food
> selection, processes followed, etc, etc. We should select a heading
> relevant to what is being described - which is an expectation of
> "behaviour" or "conduct".  "Code of Conduct", Principles of Conduct" better
> describe what should be covered.
>
> [1] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2015-02-05
>
> On 5/02/2015 3:51 am, Carl Reed wrote:
>
>> Venka et. al.
>>
>> You might be interested in the OGC Principals of Conduct which is itself
>> based on the IETF Code of Conduct.
>>
>> http://www.opengeospatial.org/ogc/policies/conduct
>>
>> Perhaps this might be helpful.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Carl Reed
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Venkatesh Raghavan
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 6:03 AM
>> To: board at lists.osgeo.org
>> Subject: Re: [Board] Proposed text for an OSGeo Code of Conduct
>>
>> On 2015/02/04 21:45, Jeff McKenna wrote:
>>
>>> Yes I agree, which is why I believe the OSGeo Foundation needs a very
>>> simple Diversity statement, that says everyone can expect an open and
>>> respectful environment (see my original draft at
>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php?title=Diversity&oldid=81445). Notice
>>> how there is no mention of policing etc in that version. Your discussions
>>> on a Code of Conduct for FOSS4G are very separate in my opinion.  In any
>>> case, the OSGeo Board will discuss this in tomorrow's meeting if you would
>>> like to attend and share your thoughts, all are welcome (
>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2015-02-05).
>>>
>>
>> I agree that any statement by OSGeo foundation in general and
>> statements pertaining to events produced/hosted/presented by
>> OSGeo Foundation should be kept separate.
>>
>> Venka
>>
>>>
>>> -jeff
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2015-02-04 6:28 AM, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm expanding this Code of Conduct thread to include the OSGeo Board,
>>>> who are proposing an alternative Code of Conduct:
>>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Diversity
>>>>
>>>> I strongly suggest that we should try to have only one OSGeo Code of
>>>> Conduct / Diversity Statement as it reduces confusion and is easier to
>>>> implement. There is beauty in simplicity. Jeff are you suggesting that
>>>> we have two? (One for conferences, and another for OSGeo?)
>>>>
>>>> On 3/02/2015 7:09 am, Jeff McKenna wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I would like Board members to edit that wiki page directly over the
>>>>> next few days, and then we can discuss this at the Board meeting on
>>>>> Thursday.  My goal is to have a new "/diversity" page linked from the
>>>>> main osgeo.org site.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jeff, I assume that since you have proposed an alternative text, that
>>>> you have issue with the prior proposed text? (as in the bottom of this
>>>> email thread). What do you see to be the limitations of the prior
>>>> proposed text?
>>>>
>>>> Also, in your email, are you requesting that only board members edit the
>>>> Diversity statement, or is it open to other community members to edit as
>>>> well?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 4/02/2015 7:16 am, Bart van den Eijnden wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Interesting, MapZen will only sponsor events which have a strong COC
>>>>> in place:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://mapzen.com/blog/mapzen-code-of-conduct
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Bart
>>>>>
>>>>>  On 25 Jan 2015, at 22:10, Cameron Shorter <cameron.shorter at gmail.com
>>>>>> <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks Eli,
>>>>>> I like your list of characteristics. I'd add:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * Have a CoC in the first place, which breaks down to:
>>>>>> ** Ensure conferences remember / realise that a CoC should be in
>>>>>> place. (Add it to our cookbook [1]  and bid process)
>>>>>> ** Make it easy to apply a CoC by referencing an existing document.
>>>>>> (Complete this discussion and provide a best practice document that
>>>>>> can be referenced).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I acknowledge your point re over-doing sexualized images discussion.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I like the qgis CoC, and suggest that if we can make adding a CoC
>>>>>> easy (by providing generic text), then we should add having a CoC a
>>>>>> requirement for OSGeo graduation. I've added a placemarker into the
>>>>>> proposed text for the next OSGeo Project Graduation Checklist. [2]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_Handbook
>>>>>> [2] http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Project_Graduation_Checklist#
>>>>>> processes.4
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 26/01/2015 5:53 am, Eli Adam wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Code of Conduct specific wording is less important than these
>>>>>>> characteristics:
>>>>>>> * Being present (i.e. not implied but clearly stated)
>>>>>>> * Appearing sincere
>>>>>>> * Being sincere
>>>>>>> * Having reasonable people implementing it
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In that regard, the similar texts you listed were all fine.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Generally, I think that we are spending too much time and emphasis on
>>>>>>> sexualized images.  We are in the open source geospatial software,
>>>>>>> geospatial standards, open data, education, and related fields; 95%+
>>>>>>> of all presentations and other content can be done entirely
>>>>>>> successfully without images of people at all.  For the 5% of cases
>>>>>>> that images of people substantively contribute to the presentation,
>>>>>>> err on the side of caution, "If in doubt, leave it out".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I like the idea of the conference committee starting with a CoC for
>>>>>>> conferences and the Board possibly modifying and expanding it to
>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>> areas of OSGeo or projects establishing their own (see QGIS,
>>>>>>> http://qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/governance/
>>>>>>> codeofconduct/codeofconduct.html)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't think that 2015 FOSS4G needs any input, they already seem to
>>>>>>> have it under control, http://2015.foss4g.org/about/codeofconduct/,
>>>>>>> and there was nothing about a CoC in the bid.  We should be focusing
>>>>>>> 2016 and beyond.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for working on guiding this process Cameron.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards, Eli
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 3:12 AM, Cameron Shorter
>>>>>>> <cameron.shorter at gmail.com <mailto:cameron.shorter at gmail.com>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi David,
>>>>>>>> Thanks for starting this discussion. When you opened the
>>>>>>>> discussion, you
>>>>>>>> very kindly offered to help set a Code of Conduct in place. How do
>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>> suggest we move toward concluding the discussion and getting a Code
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> Conduct in place?
>>>>>>>> Do you have a timeframe in mind for this? I assume we should try to
>>>>>>>> make a
>>>>>>>> CoC available for FOSS4G 2015 if they wish to make use of one?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Peter, thanks for you comments on proposed text.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is there anyone else with an interest in influencing the final
>>>>>>>> text? If so,
>>>>>>>> please speak up.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Which is the better version of a CoC?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1. Prior foss4g: https://2015.foss4g-na.org/code-conduct
>>>>>>>> 2. OReilly: http://www.oreilly.com/conferences/code-of-conduct.html
>>>>>>>> (copied
>>>>>>>> below)
>>>>>>>> 3. My revised version (copied below)
>>>>>>>> 4. Something else
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 19/01/2015 9:16 am, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi David,
>>>>>>>> I'm happy to move proposed CoC text across to a wiki. If requested,
>>>>>>>> I'll
>>>>>>>> copy across now (within 48 hours), or can wait till there has been
>>>>>>>> further
>>>>>>>> discussion.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also happy to expand the discussion to other lists, although I
>>>>>>>> expect the
>>>>>>>> conference committee is probably the logical primary point for
>>>>>>>> discussion,
>>>>>>>> as a CoC is most applicable to conferences. The board would need to
>>>>>>>> sign off
>>>>>>>> on a CoC and should be invited to comment.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Re identifying what should be in a code of conduct. I've attempted
>>>>>>>> to start
>>>>>>>> on that in the list of items I've attempted to address, listed
>>>>>>>> below.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have presented the draft CoC (below), as I find it is often
>>>>>>>> easier to
>>>>>>>> start with a "straw man" which can be picked apart, rather than
>>>>>>>> talking
>>>>>>>> vaguely in conceptual levels. However, I'm not wedded to the text,
>>>>>>>> and hope
>>>>>>>> to see constructive criticism of the ideas, text and structure.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 19/01/2015 3:46 am, David William Bitner wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I really want to thank everyone here for engaging in this issue. I
>>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>> appreciate all the different voices that have contributed to this
>>>>>>>> conversation -- they all certainly speak to the diversity of
>>>>>>>> thoughts and
>>>>>>>> experiences that we already have in this community.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cameron -- thank you very much for putting forward a first draft of
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> potential CoC for us to use. Before drafting and wordsmithing a CoC
>>>>>>>> I want
>>>>>>>> to step back and make sure we answer a few questions that would
>>>>>>>> certainly
>>>>>>>> impact how a CoC gets written. When we get to the point of
>>>>>>>> drafting, we
>>>>>>>> should certainly do so on the wiki (or other trackable
>>>>>>>> collaborative medium)
>>>>>>>> rather than in an email thread.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> With some of the wording in this draft as well as seeing the
>>>>>>>> discussion from
>>>>>>>> the last Board Meeting, is the conference committee the correct
>>>>>>>> venue for
>>>>>>>> this discussion or should this be at the Board level so that this
>>>>>>>> applies to
>>>>>>>> all OSGeo activities (mailing lists, events, etc)? I am certain
>>>>>>>> that many of
>>>>>>>> the same people would remain engaged in helping draft a Code of
>>>>>>>> Conduct
>>>>>>>> either for the foundation as a whole or just for our events, but
>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>> certainly impacts the scope and wording required in a draft.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Many of the comments that I read as against having a CoC seem to
>>>>>>>> stem from
>>>>>>>> people wondering what does a CoC solve. Sadly, having a CoC does
>>>>>>>> not "solve"
>>>>>>>> anything. There will still be issues. A CoC simply provides one
>>>>>>>> tool for us
>>>>>>>> to help resolve those issues when they come up as well as providing
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> proactive statement that we aim to be a welcoming and diverse
>>>>>>>> community to
>>>>>>>> hopefully prevent some of those issues in the first place. A CoC is
>>>>>>>> not the
>>>>>>>> end point of diversity initiatives, but it is a very low hanging
>>>>>>>> fruit to
>>>>>>>> start with. Other initiatives that I know have been tried that we
>>>>>>>> should
>>>>>>>> continue to look at their effectiveness include author blind public
>>>>>>>> program
>>>>>>>> review, scholarship initiatives, proactively seeking out diversity
>>>>>>>> in key
>>>>>>>> notes, and many more things that we haven't tried.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 18/01/2015 2:33 pm, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Following on from this email thread, I've drafted a proposed Code of
>>>>>>>> Conduct, where I've aimed to address:
>>>>>>>> * Be concise (concise words get read more)
>>>>>>>> * Cover key messages
>>>>>>>> * Include an escalation process for dealing with both minor and
>>>>>>>> major issues
>>>>>>>> * Ensure key terms are understood (in particular reference to
>>>>>>>> definition of
>>>>>>>> sexualised images)
>>>>>>>> * Couch in positive language
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Tickbox version:
>>>>>>>> * I agree to act respectfully toward others in line with the OSGeo
>>>>>>>> Code of
>>>>>>>> Conduct.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OSGeo Code of Conduct:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This Code of Conduct collates the collective values adopted by our
>>>>>>>> OSGeo
>>>>>>>> community which baselines the behaviour we do and don’t support to
>>>>>>>> ensure
>>>>>>>> OSGeo is a safe and productive environment for all.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We invite everyone to be respectful to all, regardless of race,
>>>>>>>> gender, age,
>>>>>>>> sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, national
>>>>>>>> origin,
>>>>>>>> ethnicity, religion, or ideas. We do not tolerate harassment of
>>>>>>>> others in
>>>>>>>> any form. Examples of harassment include offensive comments, verbal
>>>>>>>> threats
>>>>>>>> or demands, sexualized images in public spaces, intimidation,
>>>>>>>> stalking,
>>>>>>>> harassing photography or recording, sustained disruption of events,
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> unwelcome physical contact or sexual attention. [1]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We expect all participants to follow the Code of Conduct when
>>>>>>>> involved in
>>>>>>>> OSGeo activities. This includes conferences, related social events,
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> online forums. Participants violating this Code of Conduct will be
>>>>>>>> asked to
>>>>>>>> desist and/or make amends. For gross or continual violations,
>>>>>>>> offenders may
>>>>>>>> be expelled from the event or forum without a refund, and/or banned
>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>> future events or other forums.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Participants are encouraged to bring any concerns to the attention
>>>>>>>> of event
>>>>>>>> staff, the forum, forum leader, or OSGeo Board. We thank all for
>>>>>>>> helping
>>>>>>>> keep OSGeo welcoming, respectful, and friendly for all.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [1] Examples of inappropriate sexualised environments are described
>>>>>>>> here:
>>>>>>>> https://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/sexual-
>>>>>>>> harassment-code-practice-what-sexual-harassment
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 10/01/2015 9:59 pm, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Looking around at various Conference "Codes of Conduct", I found the
>>>>>>>> O'Reilly definition to be eloquently worded, and less threatening to
>>>>>>>> potential attendees. (Although I still can't find a clear
>>>>>>>> definition of
>>>>>>>> "sexual images".)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.oreilly.com/conferences/code-of-conduct.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Code of Conduct
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> At O'Reilly, we assume that most people are intelligent and
>>>>>>>> well-intended,
>>>>>>>> and we're not inclined to tell people what to do. However, we want
>>>>>>>> every
>>>>>>>> O'Reilly conference to be a safe and productive environment for
>>>>>>>> everyone. To
>>>>>>>> that end, this code of conduct spells out the behavior we support
>>>>>>>> and don't
>>>>>>>> support at conferences. The core of our approach is this:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We don't condone harassment or offensive behavior, at our
>>>>>>>> conference venues
>>>>>>>> or anywhere. It's counter to our company values. More importantly,
>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>> counter to our values as human beings.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We're voicing our strong, unequivocal support of appropriate
>>>>>>>> behavior by all
>>>>>>>> participants at technical events, including all O'Reilly
>>>>>>>> conferences. We
>>>>>>>> invite you to help us make each O'Reilly conference a place that is
>>>>>>>> welcoming and respectful to all participants, regardless of race,
>>>>>>>> gender,
>>>>>>>> age, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, national
>>>>>>>> origin,
>>>>>>>> ethnicity, or religion. So that everyone can focus on the
>>>>>>>> conference itself,
>>>>>>>> and the great networking and community richness that happens when
>>>>>>>> we get
>>>>>>>> together in person, we will not tolerate harassment of conference
>>>>>>>> participants in any form—in person or online.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Examples of harassment include offensive comments, verbal threats or
>>>>>>>> demands, sexualized images in public spaces, intimidation, stalking,
>>>>>>>> harassing photography or recording, sustained disruption of
>>>>>>>> sessions or
>>>>>>>> events, and unwelcome physical contact or sexual attention.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We expect all participants—attendees, speakers, sponsors, and
>>>>>>>> volunteers—to
>>>>>>>> follow the Code of Conduct during the conference. This includes
>>>>>>>> conference-related social events at off-site locations, and in
>>>>>>>> related
>>>>>>>> online communities and social media. Participants asked to stop any
>>>>>>>> harassing behavior are expected to comply immediately. Conference
>>>>>>>> participants violating this Code of Conduct may be expelled from the
>>>>>>>> conference without a refund, and/or banned from future O'Reilly
>>>>>>>> events, at
>>>>>>>> the discretion of O'Reilly Media.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please bring any concerns to the immediate attention of the event
>>>>>>>> staff, or
>>>>>>>> contact our VP of Conferences, Gina Blaber at gina at oreilly.com. We
>>>>>>>> thank our
>>>>>>>> participants for your help in keeping the event welcoming,
>>>>>>>> respectful, and
>>>>>>>> friendly to all participants.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Read the blog post by Tim O'Reilly that is the basis of our
>>>>>>>> functional code
>>>>>>>> of conduct for all O'Reilly conferences.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks to the Lean Startup folks and the jsconf.us folks, whose
>>>>>>>> Codes of
>>>>>>>> Conduct inspired some changes to our own.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Cameron Shorter,
>>>>>>>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
>>>>>>>> LISAsoft
>>>>>>>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>>>>>>>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Cameron Shorter,
>>>>>>>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
>>>>>>>> LISAsoft
>>>>>>>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>>>>>>>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Cameron Shorter,
>>>>>>>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
>>>>>>>> LISAsoft
>>>>>>>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>>>>>>>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Conference_dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Cameron Shorter,
>>>>>> Software and Data Solutions Manager
>>>>>> LISAsoft
>>>>>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
>>>>>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>>>>>>
>>>>>> P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com <http://www.lisasoft.com>,  F
>>>>>> +61 2 9009 5099
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Conference_dev mailing list
>>>>>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  _______________________________________________
>>> Board mailing list
>>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>> _______________________________________________
>> Board mailing list
>> Board at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
>>
>
> --
> Cameron Shorter,
> Software and Data Solutions Manager
> LISAsoft
> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009
>
> P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/attachments/20150209/af6d324b/attachment-0001.html>