[FOSS4G-Oceania] FOSS4G-Oceania Governance
Cameron Shorter
cameron.shorter at gmail.com
Thu Nov 29 16:24:39 PST 2018
+1 from me for creating a light weight legal entity for our region's
foss4g.
+1 for the name "OSGeo-Oceania".
Like Greg, I acknowledge Kerry's comments, and think they are valid and
worth discussing seriously. I think we should allow sufficient time for
Kerry to state her case, and potentially allow others outside our
current committee to weigh in with their thoughts. (Maybe a few weeks).
One thing which I think is important is that the control of the FOSS4G
event should remain with our FOSS4G committee as opposed to SSSI committee.
I've previously argued against creating a legal entity for OSGeo-AustNZ
(post FOSS4G 2009) as I felt we introduced legal overhead without any
notable gain. However, running a conference does require a legal entity.
Another legal entity we could consider using is the international OSGeo
foundation. Again, I think controlling locally is better than seeding
control to the international OSGeo.
Cameron
On 30/11/18 11:06 am, Greg Lauer wrote:
> Hi Kerry,
>
> Great comments. I think you have a good point around the long term viability of a new organisation, and potential overlap. I tend not to agree so much on relying on another entity like SSSI to manage ‘our’ (open source and data) interests. Although there is some overlap the aims of the respective organisations are quite different. I do see a strong partnerships between the various entities, especially SSSI, and of course SSSI support to date has been absolutely fantastic and would argue that we need to continue that as it is the benefit of all.
>
> I support a new entity representing the FOSS4G and OSM community in the Oceania region, and belive we have the support in the region to manage this long term.
>
> I welcome all views and more than happy to be persuaded otherwise ;-)
>
> Cheers
>
> Greg
>
>
>
>> On 30 Nov 2018, at 04:03, Kerry Smyth <bkerphil at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Alex, John & Others
>> In my view there are 2 different entities being discussed:
>>
>> 1. A new association with all its independent finance, risk, membership and governance; quite an undertaking, given the number of existing factions overlapping in the Geospatial arena.
>> The energy required to run such an association can become quickly diluted after the initial flush of enthusiasm. There are plenty of examples of group enthusiasm becoming burnt out due to "overheads" outweighing "core mission".
>>
>> 2. A business unit/entity for the conference events only, that is hosted by a partner affiliation who provides the financial and risk infrastructure. Relieving the conference co-chairs of personal financial risk would be preferred for succession and ongoing commitment of the organising committee.
>>
>> I think that FOSS4G & SotM are well suited as an ongoing interest group within the broad spectrum of SSSI. Both groups would benefit without diluting the already small Geospatial community into further splinter groups.
>>
>> Regards
>> Kerry Smyth
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: FOSS4G-Oceania <foss4g-oceania-bounces at lists.osgeo.org> On Behalf Of foss4g-oceania-request at lists.osgeo.org
>> Sent: Thursday, 29 November 2018 8:36 PM
>> To: foss4g-oceania at lists.osgeo.org
>> Subject: FOSS4G-Oceania Digest, Vol 6, Issue 49
>>
>> Send FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list submissions to
>> foss4g-oceania at lists.osgeo.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> foss4g-oceania-request at lists.osgeo.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> foss4g-oceania-owner at lists.osgeo.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of FOSS4G-Oceania digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Re: Governance (Greg Lauer)
>> 2. Re: Governance (adam steer)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2018 22:04:13 +1000
>> From: Greg Lauer <gregory.lauer at gmail.com>
>> To: Daniel Silk <dwsilk at gmail.com>
>> Cc: Alex Leith <alexgleith at gmail.com>, foss4g-oceania
>> <foss4g-oceania at lists.osgeo.org>
>> Subject: Re: [FOSS4G-Oceania] Governance
>> Message-ID:
>> <CAMJUsj75OqJHvmfH_abh6D+UKEo21rKvBkcEafphjDsPXvz-Mg at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> I support Daniels comments. Setting up an entity is similar in each state.
>> I have done this in QLD and NZ. I think an entity is the way to progress.
>>
>> I am on a plane at 12pm (finally going home) so will miss the meeting
>>
>> Greg
>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 5:35 PM Daniel Silk <dwsilk at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> If for example, incorporating in Victoria:
>>> https://www.consumer.vic.gov.au/clubs-and-fundraising/incorporated-ass
>>> ociations/become-an-incorporated-association/register-as-an-incorporat
>>> ed-association
>>>
>>> The requirements are:
>>> 1. At least 5 members
>>> 2. Non-profit
>>> 3. We have a name (the hard part!)
>>> 4. We have rules (a constitution)
>>> 5. We have a purpose
>>> 6. We hold a meeting (with 21 days advance notice required) and vote
>>> to incorporate
>>>
>>> Later:
>>> 7. We must have an AGM within 18 months of incorporation and then
>>> within 5 months of the end of every financial year at which a
>>> financial report is tabled and signed off by at least two members 8.
>>> We must maintain a list of members including each members name,
>>> address and date they became a member
>>>
>>> Seems like that's about it.
>>>
>>> Note that the incorporated associations material for Victoria refers
>>> to a "committee", not a "board".
>>>
>>> ------
>>>
>>> In regards to governance then, here is my proposal.
>>>
>>> For simplicity, let's incorporate as "OSGeo Oceania" but with a clear
>>> purpose statement that supports not just open source geospatial
>>> software, but open geospatial data as well. If we are an incorporated
>>> association and name one committee member as the primary contact point
>>> with the OSM Foundation, then we satisfy all requirements to apply to
>>> be an OSMF local chapter.
>>>
>>> This is similar to FOSSGIS in Germany which is also the local chapter
>>> for both OSGeo and OSMF. The Belgian and Italian OSMF local chapters
>>> are also organisations that are the local chapters for multiple
>>> international organisations.
>>>
>>> I realise that this may be seen as diluting the importance of the OSM
>>> aspect and am happy to be challenged on this. I think it is very
>>> important that we continue to work together and I really enjoyed that
>>> we had strong open source geospatial, open data and OpenStreetMap
>>> aspects to our inaugural conference. I do think that it is hard to
>>> come up with a name that cohesively brings all of that together. It
>>> would be great to continue to work on that snappier name for next
>>> years conference. For the association though, the purpose statement is
>>> much more important than the name. OSGeo has already shown that it is
>>> keen to support OpenStreetMap so I think we can achieve our broader goals under "OSGeo Oceania".
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Daniel
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 7:36 PM Alex Leith <alexgleith at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi John and others
>>>>
>>>> I'm not clear yet what the minimum we can do is, in terms of a legal
>>>> entity. Do others have experience here? I had a quick read here
>>>> <https://www.ato.gov.au/Non-profit/Getting-started/In-detail/Registra
>>>> tion/Overview-of-legal-structures/>,
>>>> but determined that I need an adult to help me with the choices!
>>>>
>>>> I have served on the board of SSSI, and understand the structures of
>>>> that organisation, which is a not-for-profit in Australia, and
>>>> there's a fair bit of governance and documentation. I think the
>>>> minimum if we had an organisation like that would be a constitution
>>>> and a board + the conference organising committee for each year.
>>>>
>>>> I think that creating an entity would be a great thing to achieve,
>>>> and we certainly have the core to start with, with our enthusiastic
>>>> committee and successful event. I'm a little hesitant, though, as I
>>>> see that we can make it work without one... we have a lot of avenues
>>>> for support, in terms of juggling finances and contractual
>>>> agreements. SSSI, SIBA, Locate, LINZ, etc...
>>>>
>>>> One more comment about the draft document is that I think limiting
>>>> committees to those that are absolutely essential is important. So if
>>>> the legal entity needs a board, we have a board, and a conference
>>>> committee. If it just needs an annual meeting, we have an annual
>>>> meeting and a conference committee! My $0.02.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Alex
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 29 Nov 2018 at 16:12 John Bryant <johnwbryant at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi committee, time for the most exciting topic of all - governance!
>>>>>
>>>>> Over the last several months, and especially last week, there were a
>>>>> number of conversations among committee members about 'what next',
>>>>> and many of these have touched on the topic of how we organise this
>>>>> committee in the future.
>>>>>
>>>>> I expect there will be quite a few ideas around this, and a range of
>>>>> opinions, so I'd like to kick off a discussion so that we can choose
>>>>> our path and move forward.
>>>>>
>>>>> We've had a productive year of working together, culminating in a
>>>>> successful event. We managed to do this quite informally, using
>>>>> consensus building to foster a shared sense of ownership of the
>>>>> conference. I'm extremely happy with how this group has worked together.
>>>>>
>>>>> I feel we are at an inflection point though, and I don't think we
>>>>> can assume that what worked this year will automatically continue to
>>>>> work. Now that we have people's attention with a successful event
>>>>> and an energised & engaged community, I feel it would be wise to
>>>>> come to more robust terms on how we manage this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Because we need to kick off a new conference planning cycle in the
>>>>> new year, we also need to determine how to bring in new people
>>>>> (importantly, including some New Zealanders), how to appoint a new chair, etc etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> At a bare minimum, I believe our next iteration of governance should
>>>>> include an updated Terms of Reference, outlining processes for
>>>>> managing committee membership, processes for appointing leadership
>>>>> and executive, rules/norms for decision making, and expectations
>>>>> around levels of participation.
>>>>>
>>>>> But there are good arguments to be made for creating a
>>>>> legally-recognised entity:
>>>>>
>>>>> - it would enable us to manage our own funds when the time is right
>>>>> (whether we choose to do this immediately or not)
>>>>> - it would enable us to enter into agreements as a body (Alex and I
>>>>> had to personally sign our partnership agreement with SSSI, as individuals)
>>>>> - it normally comes with a well-developed set of rules for
>>>>> governance that we can adjust to our liking
>>>>> - I believe that committee members would be somewhat protected from
>>>>> personal liability
>>>>> - it would provide a strong signal to the community that there is a
>>>>> persistent body in place to steward the conference and other initiatives,
>>>>> and ideally lay out a strong foundation for the long term
>>>>>
>>>>> I have definitely heard people warn against the administrative
>>>>> overhead of setting up a formal entity, but having done this in the
>>>>> past (in Canada mind you), and reading through the docs, I don't see
>>>>> this as especially onerous. But there is more work to do on understanding the details.
>>>>>
>>>>> In any case, we need to figure out how to move on to the next phase.
>>>>> In terms of timing, I think *we should try and come to agreement on
>>>>> a clear path forward within about 2 weeks (14th Dec)*, so that we
>>>>> can begin the new year with purpose and direction.
>>>>>
>>>>> Daniel and I had a good chat about this stuff this morning, and have
>>>>> started a draft document
>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KkUl-qwb2pE5OomHy-0RwKSsXJDOkFx
>>>>> 0dpW6Dhfv624/edit> we can use (in addition to this email thread) to
>>>>> focus our efforts.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Your thoughts/questions/ideas/concerns please!*
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>> John
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
>>>>> FOSS4G-Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Alex Leith
>>>> 0419 189 050
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
>>>> FOSS4G-Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
>>> FOSS4G-Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
>>>
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/foss4g-oceania/attachments/20181129/607056c3/attachment-0001.html>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2018 23:35:44 +1100
>> From: adam steer <adam.d.steer at gmail.com>
>> To: Greg Lauer <gregory.lauer at gmail.com>
>> Cc: Daniel Silk <dwsilk at gmail.com>, foss4g-oceania
>> <foss4g-oceania at lists.osgeo.org>
>> Subject: Re: [FOSS4G-Oceania] Governance
>> Message-ID:
>> <CAFORoyhRZ=khvDNPvpok=Y-YbDAGcGDm-GHxN=xjA+6SoN1KBg at mail.gmail.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Hi all, great discussion and thanks John/Daniel for starting a governance document.
>>
>> re. incorporating an association - Greg/Daniel mainly: any difficulties forseeable with international currency movement? ie for wellington 2019? I suppose we can follow OSGeo and charge for things in a dominant regional currency.
>>
>> naming: yeah tricky. OSGeo Oceania seems allright to me, but I’m biased and lazy. I’d like to keep the OSM folks involved, a few talks at the event were perfect for bringing less technical folk along for the ride - so it’d be fantastic to have that connection/window open into different worlds.
>>
>> Also trying to cast 10 years into the future and see what’s going to be relevant, I still can’t come up with any better idea (see bias). I’m sure we can find sustaining local sponsors to cover costs; and conferences will be the primary means of income…
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Thu, 29 Nov 2018 at 23:04, Greg Lauer <gregory.lauer at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I support Daniels comments. Setting up an entity is similar in each state.
>>> I have done this in QLD and NZ. I think an entity is the way to progress.
>>>
>>> I am on a plane at 12pm (finally going home) so will miss the meeting
>>>
>>> Greg
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 5:35 PM Daniel Silk <dwsilk at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If for example, incorporating in Victoria:
>>>> https://www.consumer.vic.gov.au/clubs-and-fundraising/incorporated-as
>>>> sociations/become-an-incorporated-association/register-as-an-incorpor
>>>> ated-association
>>>>
>>>> The requirements are:
>>>> 1. At least 5 members
>>>> 2. Non-profit
>>>> 3. We have a name (the hard part!)
>>>> 4. We have rules (a constitution)
>>>> 5. We have a purpose
>>>> 6. We hold a meeting (with 21 days advance notice required) and vote
>>>> to incorporate
>>>>
>>>> Later:
>>>> 7. We must have an AGM within 18 months of incorporation and then
>>>> within
>>>> 5 months of the end of every financial year at which a financial
>>>> report is tabled and signed off by at least two members 8. We must
>>>> maintain a list of members including each members name, address and
>>>> date they became a member
>>>>
>>>> Seems like that's about it.
>>>>
>>>> Note that the incorporated associations material for Victoria refers
>>>> to a "committee", not a "board".
>>>>
>>>> ------
>>>>
>>>> In regards to governance then, here is my proposal.
>>>>
>>>> For simplicity, let's incorporate as "OSGeo Oceania" but with a clear
>>>> purpose statement that supports not just open source geospatial
>>>> software, but open geospatial data as well. If we are an incorporated
>>>> association and name one committee member as the primary contact
>>>> point with the OSM Foundation, then we satisfy all requirements to
>>>> apply to be an OSMF local chapter.
>>>>
>>>> This is similar to FOSSGIS in Germany which is also the local chapter
>>>> for both OSGeo and OSMF. The Belgian and Italian OSMF local chapters
>>>> are also organisations that are the local chapters for multiple
>>>> international organisations.
>>>>
>>>> I realise that this may be seen as diluting the importance of the OSM
>>>> aspect and am happy to be challenged on this. I think it is very
>>>> important that we continue to work together and I really enjoyed that
>>>> we had strong open source geospatial, open data and OpenStreetMap
>>>> aspects to our inaugural conference. I do think that it is hard to
>>>> come up with a name that cohesively brings all of that together. It
>>>> would be great to continue to work on that snappier name for next
>>>> years conference. For the association though, the purpose statement
>>>> is much more important than the name. OSGeo has already shown that it
>>>> is keen to support OpenStreetMap so I think we can achieve our broader goals under "OSGeo Oceania".
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Daniel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 7:36 PM Alex Leith <alexgleith at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi John and others
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not clear yet what the minimum we can do is, in terms of a legal
>>>>> entity. Do others have experience here? I had a quick read here
>>>>> <https://www.ato.gov.au/Non-profit/Getting-started/In-detail/Registr
>>>>> ation/Overview-of-legal-structures/>,
>>>>> but determined that I need an adult to help me with the choices!
>>>>>
>>>>> I have served on the board of SSSI, and understand the structures of
>>>>> that organisation, which is a not-for-profit in Australia, and
>>>>> there's a fair bit of governance and documentation. I think the
>>>>> minimum if we had an organisation like that would be a constitution
>>>>> and a board + the conference organising committee for each year.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that creating an entity would be a great thing to achieve,
>>>>> and we certainly have the core to start with, with our enthusiastic
>>>>> committee and successful event. I'm a little hesitant, though, as I
>>>>> see that we can make it work without one... we have a lot of avenues
>>>>> for support, in terms of juggling finances and contractual
>>>>> agreements. SSSI, SIBA, Locate, LINZ, etc...
>>>>>
>>>>> One more comment about the draft document is that I think limiting
>>>>> committees to those that are absolutely essential is important. So
>>>>> if the legal entity needs a board, we have a board, and a conference
>>>>> committee. If it just needs an annual meeting, we have an annual
>>>>> meeting and a conference committee! My $0.02.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> Alex
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, 29 Nov 2018 at 16:12 John Bryant <johnwbryant at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi committee, time for the most exciting topic of all - governance!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Over the last several months, and especially last week, there were
>>>>>> a number of conversations among committee members about 'what
>>>>>> next', and many of these have touched on the topic of how we
>>>>>> organise this committee in the future.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I expect there will be quite a few ideas around this, and a range
>>>>>> of opinions, so I'd like to kick off a discussion so that we can
>>>>>> choose our path and move forward.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We've had a productive year of working together, culminating in a
>>>>>> successful event. We managed to do this quite informally, using
>>>>>> consensus building to foster a shared sense of ownership of the
>>>>>> conference. I'm extremely happy with how this group has worked together.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I feel we are at an inflection point though, and I don't think we
>>>>>> can assume that what worked this year will automatically continue
>>>>>> to work. Now that we have people's attention with a successful
>>>>>> event and an energised & engaged community, I feel it would be wise
>>>>>> to come to more robust terms on how we manage this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because we need to kick off a new conference planning cycle in the
>>>>>> new year, we also need to determine how to bring in new people
>>>>>> (importantly, including some New Zealanders), how to appoint a new chair, etc etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At a bare minimum, I believe our next iteration of governance
>>>>>> should include an updated Terms of Reference, outlining processes
>>>>>> for managing committee membership, processes for appointing
>>>>>> leadership and executive, rules/norms for decision making, and
>>>>>> expectations around levels of participation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But there are good arguments to be made for creating a
>>>>>> legally-recognised entity:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - it would enable us to manage our own funds when the time is right
>>>>>> (whether we choose to do this immediately or not)
>>>>>> - it would enable us to enter into agreements as a body (Alex and I
>>>>>> had to personally sign our partnership agreement with SSSI, as individuals)
>>>>>> - it normally comes with a well-developed set of rules for
>>>>>> governance that we can adjust to our liking
>>>>>> - I believe that committee members would be somewhat protected from
>>>>>> personal liability
>>>>>> - it would provide a strong signal to the community that there is a
>>>>>> persistent body in place to steward the conference and other initiatives,
>>>>>> and ideally lay out a strong foundation for the long term
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have definitely heard people warn against the administrative
>>>>>> overhead of setting up a formal entity, but having done this in the
>>>>>> past (in Canada mind you), and reading through the docs, I don't
>>>>>> see this as especially onerous. But there is more work to do on understanding the details.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In any case, we need to figure out how to move on to the next
>>>>>> phase. In terms of timing, I think *we should try and come to
>>>>>> agreement on a clear path forward within about 2 weeks (14th Dec)*,
>>>>>> so that we can begin the new year with purpose and direction.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Daniel and I had a good chat about this stuff this morning, and
>>>>>> have started a draft document
>>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KkUl-qwb2pE5OomHy-0RwKSsXJDOkF
>>>>>> x0dpW6Dhfv624/edit> we can use (in addition to this email thread)
>>>>>> to focus our efforts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Your thoughts/questions/ideas/concerns please!*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>> John
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
>>>>>> FOSS4G-Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Alex Leith
>>>>> 0419 189 050
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
>>>>> FOSS4G-Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
>>>> FOSS4G-Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
>>> FOSS4G-Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Adam Steer
>> http://spatialised.net
>> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Adam_Steer
>> http://au.linkedin.com/in/adamsteer
>> http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0046-7236
>> +61 427 091 712
>> skype: adam.d.steer
>> tweet: @adamdsteer
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/foss4g-oceania/attachments/20181129/f4f2129d/attachment.html>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Subject: Digest Footer
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
>> FOSS4G-Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> End of FOSS4G-Oceania Digest, Vol 6, Issue 49
>> *********************************************
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
>> FOSS4G-Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
> _______________________________________________
> FOSS4G-Oceania mailing list
> FOSS4G-Oceania at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss4g-oceania
--
Cameron Shorter
Technology Demystifier
Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant
M +61 (0) 419 142 254
More information about the FOSS4G-Oceania
mailing list