[Ica-osgeo-labs] "Geo4All - MapStory Challenge" - FOSS4G 2016 Student Competitions

Thu Oct 1 02:03:06 PDT 2015

Dear All,

In a conference hosted by and also the cash award being
provided by the OSGeo Foundation, I see no wrong in
considering innovative use and/or value addition to  the
OSGeo software stack as one of the criteria for final
selection for student awards.

The other criteria (in case of software
development related presentation) would be that
the presented software is made available under an
appropriate Open Source License (after all the award is
being made at a FOSS4G conference). I think that is what Jeff
and Maxi are trying to say too.

"OSGeo Best Oral Presentation Student Award" and
"OSGeo Best Oral Poster Student Award" at FOSS4G-2015
were selected based on shortlisting of student presentations
based on evaluation by Academic session chairs. The final
selection was made by the Awards Committee (comprising
most of the session chairs (some who had their return flights
earlier could not be at the meeting) and Geo4All advisory
board members who were present at the conference.  One
of the criteria applied in the final selection was as stated
in the previous paragraph "innovative use and/or value addition
to OSGeo software stack".

The "FOSS4G Seoul Best Oral Presentation Student Award" and
"FOSS4G Seoul Best Poster Presentation Award" with cash award
provided by the Seoul LoC, also followed the same procedure/criteria.
One of the presentation was more related to Open Hardware coupled
with a widely used Open Source package not under the OSGeo umbrella
  (as yet).

If there is to be a "MapStory Challenge" in future, it can be considered
as a separate award sponsored by folks connected to MapStory Foundation,
just like GeoCat b.v. sponsored "FOSS4G Developer Award" that was 
presented at
FOSS4G-2015. GeoCat also formulated it's own selection procedure
in consultation with the Seoul LoC.

Best

Venka

On 10/1/2015 5:01 PM, Massimiliano Cannata wrote:
> Dear all
> I agree with Jeff principles.
> During the osgwo event we should shomehow foster osgeo. Everywhere.
> I do not want to enter into porocedural details or rules of prize
> assignment.
> I just would like to see clearly incetivayed the use of osgeo software.
> Then also someone who make amzing things mixing proprietary and open source
> non-osgeo could win the award.
>
> But to reinforce osgeo brand and to help osgeo projects i would like this
> principle clearly promoted.
>
> Then i undrstand geo4all is not osgeo and it can do whatever it believes is
> better and osgeo do not have any autoritative role to drive this.
>
> Maxi
> Il 01/Ott/2015 06:57, "Suchith Anand" <Suchith.Anand at nottingham.ac.uk> ha
> scritto:
>
>> Dimitris ,  Very good points  and i hope Jeff will come with more
>> clarifications/answers to these queries.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Suchith
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: ica-osgeo-labs-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [
>> ica-osgeo-labs-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] on behalf of Dimitris Kotzinos [
>> kotzino at gmail.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 12:34 AM
>> To: ica-osgeo-labs at lists.osgeo.org
>> Subject: Re: [Ica-osgeo-labs] "Geo4All - MapStory Challenge" - FOSS4G
>> 2016      Student Competitions
>>
>> Hi Jeff, all
>>
>> before taking a final position on your - admittedly - strong note on the
>> Geo4All awards, I would like to ask some clarifications and offer some
>> comments hoping that this will facilitate the discussion and avoid
>> making it a conflict. Let me say first that I understand the reasoning
>> saying that an award funded by OSGEO, in the main OSGEO event, should
>> focus on OSGEO software.
>> So some requests for clarifications first:
>> - how do you see the award selection working: students are allowed to
>> submit when they are using at a 100% OSGEO projects? What happens when
>> for a specific student task an OSGEO project is not available? What
>> happens when the student add his/hers own source code to do something
>> (which could be in the form of a tool or an external library)? Do we
>> talk about full projects or also about non-OSGEO libraries used in
>> student projects?
>> Personally I would understand more a position that says that the
>> projects should use substantially (by this I mean playing a crucial role
>> in the project) at least one OSGEO project.
>> - I was confused by your answer to Gert-Jan: if the LOC has full
>> authority, then the instructions apply only to the Geo4All community?
>> - do you see this as a decision to be made by the OSGEO President or the
>> Board or by the Geo4All community, which in principle includes also
>> people not related to OSGEO (since it is a joint OSGEO/ISPRS/ICA
>> initiative?
>> - why do you differentiate between the global and the regional FOSS4G?
>> Since now at the European and the NA FOSS4G are becoming equally big
>> with the international one (with their own limitations of course) I
>> cannot understand why you differentiate. At least from a Geo4All
>> perspective (but also from my perspective for OSGEO's future) I cannot
>> see the difference.
>>
>> Some comments, if anyone is interested: from my academic (and thus maybe
>> limited or biased) perspective this is not a good way to advance. I
>> always try to get students to use the best tool they have for the job,
>> with one of the most important factors of choosing the best to be its
>> openness both in terms of software license but also (if relevant) in
>> protocols/standards and data used. So for me it would be at least weird
>> to tell them (important to note that we are teaching these students)
>> that excellence and quality and openness come after the OSGEO brand.
>> Also I think that most (I would even go as far as to say that all) of
>> our projects are of top quality and if a student is looking for a tool
>> to implement a project idea then they will be his/hers first choice.
>> Imposing a purity restriction actually gives a message that we are not
>> so confident on that.
>>
>> Please take this as an effort to discuss this, as I said I understand
>> also the reasoning behind Jeff's message. I am not yet convinced that
>> these reasons supersede other principles and also provide more benefits
>> than the issues they raise.
>> My 2c and thanks for listening,
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Dimitris
>> _______________________________________________
>> ica-osgeo-labs mailing list
>> ica-osgeo-labs at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ica-osgeo-labs
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
>> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
>> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>>
>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
>> message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
>> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
>> University of Nottingham.
>>
>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
>> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
>> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
>> permitted by UK legislation.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ica-osgeo-labs mailing list
>> ica-osgeo-labs at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ica-osgeo-labs
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ica-osgeo-labs mailing list
> ica-osgeo-labs at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ica-osgeo-labs

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geoforall/attachments/20151001/31bf404c/attachment.html>