[OSGeo-Conf] RfP Document for RfP 2021

[Eli Adam]

On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 9:52 AM Till Adams <till.adams at fossgis.de> wrote:
>
> Eli, @all,
>
> sry, I did not reply. Personnally I don't mind, as I have no big clue
> about these repos - my development time was in times of SVN ... ;-)
>
> In general I agee, the repo must be open to pulic. If tht is not the
> case ,we should stay with the old one. To be sure (I know I have access
> somewhere) could you please upload the latest Rfp2021 doc into the ld SVN?

You have commit rights to the SVN repo or if that isn't your OSGeo
userid, I can add it.  Do any other Conference Committee members want
commit rights for our SVN repo?

In any case, I've added it.  Please check that things are all correct
and as you want it.  https://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/changeset/12765/ and
https://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/changeset/12766/ (rename files removing
"draft")

>
> We have to kick out the call by tomorrow.

Let me know if you need anything else.  Feel free to use your own
access as well.

Thanks for putting this all together!

Best regards, Eli

>
> Thanks, Till
>
>
> Am 05.09.19 um 17:06 schrieb Eli Adam:
> > On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 12:23 AM Till Adams <till.adams at fossgis.de> wrote:
> >> Jachym,
> >>
> >> I accepted the last small edits of Paul now, could you please load up
> >> the RfP document [1] today and send me a message, that all is ready ;-) ?
> > This new Gitea repo should be public and not private right?
> >
> > Till and others who is planning on directly making commits to the new
> > repo?  I'm hoping that it will be at least a few people.
> >
> > Best regards, Eli
> >
> >> When you added it, could you also adapt the link to the document in [2],
> >> I tzhink it makes sense to put the financial sheets also in the new
> >> repo, can you also do that and alter the link?
> >>
> >>
> >> Many thanks,
> >>
> >> Till
> >>
> >>
> >> [1]
> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SUA7Kt6EEtLj6ZWSensMjFnMNxCamXe4jupmKN-O-kc
> >>
> >> [2] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_2021_Bid_Process -> chapter "RFP
> >> Documents"
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Am 04.09.19 um 16:59 schrieb Eli Adam:
> >>> This time resent to include the list.
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 3:02 PM Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> wrote:
> >>>> Hi all,
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm somewhat indifferent on platform as long as SAC is supporting it
> >>>> or it is otherwise reliable.  I've not kept up to date on OSGeo Gitea.
> >>>> Which projects use this as their primary repo?
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 6:17 AM Jachym Cepicky <jachym.cepicky at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> Hi Till (and all the others),
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I suggest, we move from SVN to Gitea [1] One of the advantages is
> >>>>> (except from - it's GIT!) is, that everybody with OSGeo UserID can
> >>>>> acces
> >>>> There is already a process to grant people SVN access,
> >>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Subversion#Add.2FRemove_Committer and I've
> >>>> offered to give access to anyone (appropriate) who wants it.  I think
> >>>> that Till already has rights here.  I'm also glad to make commits for
> >>>> anyone as needed if they for some reason don't want to do it
> >>>> themselves.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm not really in favor of change for the sake of change but if it
> >>>> leads to more people contributing, I'm all for that!  Who would
> >>>> contribute if we switch to Gitea?
> >>>>
> >>>> This url, https://git.osgeo.org/gitea/conference-commitee/foss4g, 404s
> >>>> for me.  If we go this route, will this be a publicly accessible url
> >>>> where anyone can track the progress?
> >>>>
> >>>> If SAC is supporting Gitea, other OSGeo projects use it as their
> >>>> primary repo, additional people will/might contribute, and it provides
> >>>> a publicly accessible url, then I'm all for switching.  Thanks for
> >>>> suggesting this Jachym.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards, Eli
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> ok?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> J
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [1] https://git.osgeo.org/gitea
> >>>>>
> >>>>> po 2. 9. 2019 v 15:14 odesílatel Till Adams <till.adams at fossgis.de> napsal:
> >>>>>> Hi CC,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I made a copy of last years RfP document here:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SUA7Kt6EEtLj6ZWSensMjFnMNxCamXe4jupmKN-O-kc
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> and shared it with the same people, so you should be able to edit (if
> >>>>>> not, please ask me). As we do not have much time left (the call will go
> >>>>>> out this friday on 6th of September) and nobody clearly stated needs to
> >>>>>> alter this document. so I regard it more or less as finished (@Guido: I
> >>>>>> accepted most of your comments/changes from last year). Nevertheless,
> >>>>>> please feel free to read and make minor changes, that improve the
> >>>>>> quality of the document or add s.th. important, that we missed before.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Can someone with SVN access upload this document as Pdf on
> >>>>>> https://svn.osgeo.org/osgeo/foss4g/rfp/2021/FOSS4G2021-request-for-proposal.pdf
> >>>>>> (as linked here: https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_2021_Bid_Process)
> >>>>>> *before* this friday?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I think we do not need any changes on the budget template sheet.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As CRO's I have agreed with Codrina and Arnulf, they will receive and
> >>>>>> count your votes and inform me with the final results of the voting steps.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So far & all the best, regards,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Till
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Jachym Cepicky
> >>>>> e-mail: jachym.cepicky gmail com
> >>>>> URL: http://les-ejk.cz
> >>>>> GPG: http://les-ejk.cz/pgp/JachymCepicky.pgp
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Conference_dev mailing list
> >>> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> >>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Conference_dev mailing list
> >> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev