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

[Massimiliano Cannata]

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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/ica-osgeo-labs/attachments/20151001/0f3eed40/attachment.html>