[OSGeo-Discuss] Proposal for the listing of projects in our new web site
Jeffrey Johnson
ortelius at gmail.com
Tue Aug 22 05:17:28 PDT 2017
In fact this should be implemented. Not sure how we overlooked this. Jachym
can you file an issue for this?
On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 00:37 Jachym Cepicky <jachym.cepicky at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Eh, new idea just came to my mind: What about adding possibility to assign
> people to service providers (companies in general) as we can assign to
> projects? After all, it's all about people, isn't it?
>
> Again, maybe it is in cotradiction with some principle, I'm missing
>
> J
>
> út 22. 8. 2017 v 2:58 odesílatel Jeffrey Johnson <ortelius at gmail.com>
> napsal:
>
>> Note the news section is intended for news related to a specific
>> service provider. Its *not* doing this now, so its unclear.
>>
>> Can you file an issue about the search. Agree this should work for a
>> project name here.
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 5:17 PM, Jachym Cepicky
>> <jachym.cepicky at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > hi,
>> >
>> > yes for me (OpenGeoLabs) it works as it is now - we are listed, we have
>> > links to projects we can support, there is logo, picture, web page,
>> once it
>> > works, we are gonna be on the map, what could I possibly ask for more?
>> (if
>> > the graphics around "News" will be made more clear)
>> >
>> > side note: maybe adding note, that if you are searching for specifing
>> > service provider related to project, you should go to project page and
>> find
>> > the service providers there, since search "geoserver" does not return
>> any
>> > result at this page
>> >
>> > J
>> >
>> >
>> > út 22. 8. 2017 v 1:24 odesílatel Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com>
>> > napsal:
>> >>
>> >> Jeff have you heard from any small companies that feel alienated? For
>> many
>> >> being a small company gives them a chance to offer personal service. I
>> do
>> >> not want to make assumptions if we can help it.
>> >>
>> >> My feedback was actually focused on the site design, partnership &
>> friend
>> >> relationships are appropriate for government and NGOs, geoforall labs
>> are
>> >> the appropriate relationship for education and science etc. If that is
>> clear
>> >> we can return to the earlier discussion - specifically about service
>> >> provider size. (we should also be sure to capture this discussion on
>> the
>> >> issue tracker so it can actually inform the review of the website).
>> >>
>> >> Many of these decisions already took place during the earlier wireframe
>> >> stage of the project (by contributors who stepped up to the marketing
>> >> committee). We already went back to the drawing table on some of the
>> key
>> >> decisions during wire framing and initial website design.
>> >>
>> >> To clearly set expectations - we will not have a chance to revisit each
>> >> and every decision due to limitations on time/budget. It is hard
>> though,
>> >> because it is much easier to care about a website when it is pretty
>> and we
>> >> can all see it :)
>> >>
>> >> My initial message to Jachym was trying to confirm that the
>> organization
>> >> size worked for opengeolabs (simply because this was already a
>> decision that
>> >> had been revisited once).
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 4:09 PM Jeff McKenna
>> >> <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi Jody,
>> >>>
>> >>> By alienating the smaller OSGeo companies in our new website, I don't
>> >>> see a benefit to OSGeo at all. Let us please all sizes of OSGeo
>> >>> companies, small and big.
>> >>>
>> >>> Yes this is tricky, for sure, even your initial message to Jachym
>> shows
>> >>> a lot of what it could be like, if OSGeo suddenly distinguishes size.
>> >>> Let's avoid this totally, I believe.
>> >>>
>> >>> I am open to other suggestions to the wording as well.
>> >>>
>> >>> Tricky! :)
>> >>>
>> >>> -jeff
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 2017-08-21 6:53 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>> >>> > I already changed it from number to the size thing.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > This list was for support providers (since the website is about
>> >>> > outreach
>> >>> > looks at projects, local chapters and service providers).
>> >>> >
>> >>> > GeoForAll labs and academic / research outreach are in slightly
>> >>> > different spot (we could cross link). See
>> >>> > http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/geo-for-all-labs/
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I do not think public:government, NGO/non-profit would like to be
>> >>> > contacted for commercial support :) That said they can be listed in
>> our
>> >>> > site as partners and friends. Sort order is given to groups with a
>> >>> > defined relationship with OSGeo (such as ISPRS, LocationTech,...).
>> See
>> >>> > http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/partners/
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Recognizing service providers on our website in this way is a new
>> thing
>> >>> > - I hope it works out :)
>> >>> >
>> >>> > This design is full of difficult decisions thanks for contributing
>> to
>> >>> > the discussion (and content).
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 3:30 PM Jeff McKenna
>> >>> > <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com <mailto:
>> jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>>
>> >>> > wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Hi Jachym,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Yes I agree, it is a slippery slope that once we/OSGeo decide
>> that
>> >>> > size
>> >>> > is an important part of our organization (as you know, many
>> other
>> >>> > organizations separate their membership by size), it opens up so
>> >>> > many
>> >>> > other challenges. For that reason, I spoke up here to suggest
>> that
>> >>> > we
>> >>> > avoid all that, by suggesting 4 options to cover that.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Indeed my proposal does include all organizations, purposely.
>> >>> > OSGeo is
>> >>> > built on that, and has done an amazing job in creating a
>> thriving
>> >>> > community.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Thanks for listening Jachym,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > -jeff
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On 2017-08-21 6:17 PM, Jachym Cepicky wrote:
>> >>> > > Hi Jeff (all)
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > currently, the page is listing "service providers" - it's
>> >>> > project
>> >>> > > oriented (as providing services to projects)
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > your proposal is shifting it little bit to "all
>> organisations",
>> >>> > not even
>> >>> > > service providing - but what is their releationship to the
>> >>> > (osgeo)
>> >>> > > projects? - still, it would be fine to me
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > I would be +1 for it, if it's does not hit to some other
>> >>> > principle,
>> >>> > > already hardcoded in the page (e.g.
>> >>> > > http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/initiatives/geo-for-all/ is
>> >>> > partly
>> >>> > > coreving the Academic/Research topic - just an example of
>> >>> > potencial
>> >>> > > conflict, which we could oversee)
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > I do not know, just noting, I have no strong opinion - I
>> want to
>> >>> > be
>> >>> > > inclusive, all for adding another categories, but the rules
>> and
>> >>> > > principals should be clear. Currently, how I understand it
>> "you
>> >>> > can be
>> >>> > > listed as long as you are providing services to projects"
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > J
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > út 22. 8. 2017 v 0:11 odesílatel Jeff McKenna
>> >>> > > <jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com
>> >>> > <mailto:jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>
>> >>> > <mailto:jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com
>> >>> > <mailto:jmckenna at gatewaygeomatics.com>>>
>> >>> > > napsal:
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > On 2017-08-21 5:11 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>> >>> > > > For your page
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/service-providers/opengeolabs/
>> Is
>> >>> > > that a
>> >>> > > > single consultant (you!) or a company?
>> >>> > > > (or perhaps it is just a company with one person in
>> it)
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Hi Jody,
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Regarding separating the OSGeo community by size, I
>> suggest
>> >>> > that we
>> >>> > > avoid offending our community members, so let's stay
>> >>> > positive
>> >>> > and make
>> >>> > > the following change:
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > I recommend that we/OSGeo change the "Organization Type"
>> >>> > section to
>> >>> > > contain the following 4 options:
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > 1. Private
>> >>> > > 2. Academic/Research
>> >>> > > 3. Public/Government
>> >>> > > 4. Non-profit
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > The same 4 options should be applied to the options in
>> the
>> >>> > "Filter"
>> >>> > > search on the site for "Service Provider Type".
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Thanks.
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Jachym: you did a great job on the OpenGeoLabs page, and
>> >>> > thanks for
>> >>> > > supporting OSGeo all of these years :)
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > -jeff
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > --
>> >>> > > Jeff McKenna
>> >>> > > President Emeritus, OSGeo Foundation
>> >>> > > http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > _______________________________________________
>> >>> >
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Discuss mailing list
>> >>> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> >>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Discuss mailing list
>> >> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Discuss mailing list
>> > Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
>> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20170822/e6512590/attachment.html>
More information about the Discuss
mailing list