[OSGeo-Standards] Input required from OSGeo Standards List Members
tomkralidis at gmail.com
Thu Sep 2 06:55:37 PDT 2021
Hi Bruce: thanks and great job leading the discussion here.
Greg: in terms of the draft, I've posted it to
I have not PDF'd the draft in the case that we need to make changes.
Note that this draft is targeted to update Exhibit A of the existing MOU.
The MOU "proper" will be drafted
once we agree on Exhibit A, at which point it will be put forth for
Let me know if this works/helps?
On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 8:27 AM Bruce Bannerman <
bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com> wrote:
> Could you please address Greg’s concerns?
> > On 2 Sep 2021, at 22:15, Greg Troxel <gdt at lexort.com> wrote:
> > Bruce Bannerman <bruce.bannerman.osgeo at gmail.com> writes:
> >> The context and link to the proposed OSGeo/OGC MOU may be found in Tom
> Kralidis’ email here:
> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/standards/2021-August/001251.html
> > I found that really hard to follow.
> > First, there's the problem of using google docs. I find that
> > unacceptable in the open source community, because of proprietary
> > software and tracking by an advertising company. I suspect many (but
> > not all) people in the osgeo community are also not happy about that.
> > I asked for a pdf of the propsoed MOU, because presumably that's the
> > form it would be adopted in, as a document of record.
> > I see some notes that could lead to a draft that could then be proposed,
> > but I don't see a "proposed MOU".
> > So if there is text that is actually proposed to be adopted, please put
> > it someplace not on google, as pdf, so that the *proposed MOU* can be
> > reviewed.
> > If there isn't yet actual proposed text, that's fine -- but please call
> > notes toward a draft soemthing else.
> > Sorry to sound difficult (except for about google docs :-) but I am
> > really unable to understand what is going on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Standards