Hi Cameron, I think with the forum you misread the latest activity as the 2 posts you mention are flagged as "sticky" and therefore remained at the top of the form threads. The "What's News" tab seems to list the recent activity in a more understandable way: http://forum.worldwindcentral.com/activity.php?s=0b55651407522df569248e8cf058c086
Best redards, Daniel On 30/11/15 04:36, Cameron Shorter wrote: > Hi Patrick, > OSGeo is about supporting Open Source Geospatial projects and users. > > Part of that help is in helping users find established projects with > active communities. > And we as Open Source projects should be helping our users in that > regard. We currently do that by using OSGeo Incubation, and the > OSGeo-Live processes. If projects haven't reached the maturity yet to > get through these processes, then we should question whether we > recommend these projects to new users yet. (We should help projects > reach this level of maturity, but OSGeo is a Do-ochracy. Ie, OSGeo > helps projects who help themselves.) > > My suspicion after a 5 minute look at the Worldwind developer help [1] > is that Worldwind has not managed to build a strong community yet. > (Email thread in October 2015, prior email thread December 2014). > There doesn't seem to be much activity. > > If we within the OSGeo community were to promote WorldWind to users, > I'd want to have more confidence in the WorldWind community. I'd > suggest that promoting and building the WorldWind community might be > more important to WorldWind than focusing on developing extra features. > > [1] > http://forum.worldwindcentral.com/forumdisplay.php?39-Development-Help&s=58cca2198b1b179bc2b90246965500df > > On 30/11/2015 6:15 am, Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX) wrote: >> Cameron, >> >> I do appreciate the spirit of the offer, thank you for that. I am >> sorry that OSGEO is not able to accept WorldWind as is. The websites >> [1] [2] have all the information needed to use this open source >> technology, along with a well-established and sophisticated community >> via the forum [3]. It's too bad that OSGEO sets their bar higher >> than simply welcoming into the fold, open source technology that is >> already ready for prime-time use. >> [1] http://webworldwind.org/ >> [2] http://goworldwind.org/ >> [3] http://forum.worldwindcentral.com/ >> >> Again, thanks for your offer, >> -Patrick >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Cameron Shorter [mailto:cameron.shor...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 10:54 AM >> To: Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX); live-demo >> Subject: Re: OSGeo-Live and WorldWind >> >> Hi Patrick, >> Sorry to hear that WorldWind is not in a position to join OSGeo-Live. >> Do you have an email list with a community of users that you could >> share this email thread with? >> Other projects have found volunteers from their community to write up >> documentation and installers for OSGeo-Live. >> >> Warm regards, Cameron >> >> On 29/11/2015 4:15 am, Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX) wrote: >>> Cameron, >>> >>> Howdy! >>> I appreciate the guidance but simply do not have the bandwidth, >>> resources or "the volunteers" for the additional 'grooming' required >>> by "How_to_add_a_project_to_OSGeoLive" [2]. >>> >>> OSGEO is welcome to use or include this technology in any way >>> conducive to their purpose, 'live' or by proxy: >>> https://github.com/NASAWorldWind/WebWorldWind >>> https://github.com/NASAWorldWind/WorldWindJava >>> >>> My humble apologies for not being able to do more. >>> >>> WorldWind is there, free and OSGEO open for anyone to leverage as >>> desired. >>> >>> -Patrick >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Cameron Shorter [mailto:cameron.shor...@gmail.com] >>> Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2015 3:37 AM >>> To: Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX) >>> Cc: ica-osgeo-l...@lists.osgeo.org; live-demo >>> Subject: Re: [Ica-osgeo-labs] [geoforall-ab] [Board] IMPORTANT - >>> feedback and vote will be needed: geo4all relationship >>> >>> Hi Patrick, >>> Great to hear your interest in including NASA Worldwind on OSGeo-Live. >>> We have recently put out a call for new projects wishing to be >>> included in the next release [1]. >>> If you are interested, and have volunteer(s) willing to put in the >>> effort to integrate with OSGeo-Live, then could you please apply as >>> per [2] >>> >>> [1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc_Press_Release_62 >>> [2] >>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc#How_to_add_a_project_to_OSGe >>> oLive >>> >>> On 28/11/2015 8:39 pm, Suchith Anand wrote: >>>> Thanks Patrick, Venka. This is exactly what we want to happen. We >>>> want to warmly welcome new projects who follow open principles in >>>> geospatial to OSGeo. >>>> >>>> Best wishes, >>>> >>>> Suchith >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> From: GeoForAll-ab [geoforall-ab-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] on behalf >>>> of Hogan, Patrick (ARC-PX) [patrick.ho...@nasa.gov] >>>> Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2015 6:44 AM >>>> To: geoforall...@lists.osgeo.org >>>> Subject: Re: [geoforall-ab] [Board] IMPORTANT - feedback and vote >>>> will be needed: geo4all relationship >>>> >>>> Venka, >>>> >>>> We would be delighted to see WorldWind included as part of the >>>> OSGEO package! >>>> https://github.com/NASAWorldWind/WebWorldWind >>>> https://github.com/NASAWorldWind/WorldWindJava >>>> Thanks for suggesting it! >>>> As have Suchith, Charlie and Phil, and others in various ways. >>>> >>>> NASA has a motto, 'for the benefit of all.' >>>> This open source software surely speaks well to that. >>>> The past few years of the Europe Challenge have been dedicated to >>>> encouraging students to do useful ^open source^ things with it for >>>> society. >>>> And all of that still stands there today, thanks to the generous >>>> support of that 2015 Sol Katz soul kitten, Prof Maria Antonia >>>> Brovelli. >>>> http://eurochallenge.como.polimi.it/ >>>> >>>> -Patrick >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: GeoForAll-ab [mailto:geoforall-ab-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On >>>> Behalf Of Venkatesh Raghavan >>>> Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2015 10:31 AM >>>> To: OSGeo Board; geoforall...@lists.osgeo.org >>>> Subject: Re: [geoforall-ab] [Board] IMPORTANT - feedback and vote >>>> will be needed: geo4all relationship >>>> >>>> On 2015/11/27 3:04, Phillip Davis wrote: >>>> Open source tools, like NASA WorldWind, are not supported nor >>>> developed by OSGeo, but clearly come under the banner of G4A. >>>> >>>> I think that is the same as what I have said. Also, "NASA OPEN >>>> SOURCE AGREEMENT VERSION 1.3" under which WorldWind is released is >>>> compatible with OSI-certified open source license [1]. >>>> >>>> Would be great if it could be included as a part of the OSGeo-Live >>>> package. >>>> >>>> Best >>>> Venka >>>> >>>> [1] https://opensource.org/licenses/NASA-1.3 >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: GeoForAll-ab [geoforall-ab-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf >>>> Of Venkatesh Raghavan [ragha...@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp] >>>> Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2015 12:02 PM >>>> To: OSGeo Board; geoforall...@lists.osgeo.org >>>> Subject: Re: [geoforall-ab] [Board] IMPORTANT - feedback and vote >>>> will be needed: geo4all Re: [geoforall-ab] [Board] relationship >>>> >>>> Dear All, >>>> >>>> I am traveling now and haven't had time to go through all the mails >>>> in this thread. Maybe what I say below could be a bit off-topic. >>>> >>>> OSGeo as a foundation has been inclusive and diverse. This is evident >>>> from the presentations at our FOSS4G events of contents the our >>>> OSGeo-Live which include several software projects that are not >>>> OSGeo projects. >>>> >>>> I think Geo4All takes up a similar position as our FOSS4G events >>>> and OSGeo-Live to include projects that are not a part of OSGeo. >>>> >>>> I have noticed some comments to the effect that OSGeo seems to >>>> about OSGeo "products" and I do not think that is true (as evident >>>> from our FOSS4G events and OSGeo Live package). >>>> >>>> There has also been some talk about where do we draw a line on what >>>> we can include under the umbrella of Geo4All. I believe that >>>> Geo4All is an initiative to promote Free and Open Source Geospatial >>>> Software. So any geospatial software that requires a proprietary >>>> software or library to be installed before it can be executed can >>>> neither be a part of OSGeo nor Geo4All. >>>> >>>> Also, any software that is not made available under a valid Open >>>> Source License can neither be a part of OSGeo nor Geo4All, I think. >>>> >>>> Geo4All as an integral part of OSGeo (Scenario 1 and 1B) or OSGeo >>>> being one of the "partners" of OSGeo is something that the Geo4All >>>> advisory board has to decide. >>>> >>>> OSGeo as a foundation, has a priority of supporting/promoting >>>> software that are its integral part. >>>> OSGeo has no issues with other open source software "products" >>>> being a part of events and initiatives supported/fostered by OSGeo. >>>> >>>> I would also like to mention that OSGeo student awards that were >>>> presented at FOSS4G-2015 are for innovative use of OSGeo "products" >>>> and as a foundation it is one of ways to promote wider use of OSGeo >>>> "products". >>>> >>>> Does ICA or ISPRS have some in-house projects or initiatives that >>>> need to be included as a part of Geo4All initiative? Or is there >>>> some compelling reason why Geo4All needs to be an independent >>>> initiatives despite fact that the "partners" have concluded an MoU >>>> to be "equal" partners in promoting Free and Open Software, Data, >>>> Standards for Geospatial Education? >>>> >>>> As I have mentioned before, Scenario 1 reflects what is presently >>>> shown in the OSGeo and Geo4All websites. Scenario 1B is a variant >>>> and only does away with the OSGeo Edu Committee. And my preference >>>> would be for either 1 or 1B over Scenario 2. >>>> >>>> Best >>>> Venka >>>> >>>> [1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GeoForAll_OSGeo_Relationship >>>> >>>> On 2015/11/27 0:05, Sanghee Shin wrote: >>>> >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> 2015. 11. 26., 오후 8:36, Arnulf Christl >>>> <arnulf.chri...@metaspatial.net작성: >>>> >>>> Dear OSGeo Board, >>>> if OSGeo does not manage to reactivate/reinvigorate the Education >>>> Committee, then we will not have one. OSGeo is a do-ocracy, right? >>>> This is how OSGeo functions. Forcing something in place just because >>>> will probably not work. >>>> >>>> In my opinion we should let Geo4All go where it wants to go, >>>> otherwise chances are high we restrict it's potential. At the same >>>> time I am absolutely sure that Geo4All will continue to focus on >>>> good, solid Open Source software as we promote it through OSGeo. If >>>> Geo4All were something that emerged "outside" of OSGeo then I would >>>> absolutely push for joining and supporting the initiative. Does >>>> this make any sense? >>>> >>>> Geo4All Advisory Board, >>>> I would like to keep the close bounds to OSGeo - simply because it is >>>> the Open Source compass for geospatial Open Source and therefore the >>>> natural place to go to for selecting best practice technology for >>>> education. >>>> >>>> Wrt. to the lab name "Geo4All Partners" sounds like a good middle >>>> path. >>>> I would refrain from externalizing Geo4All as a separate legal entity. >>>> This will only eat up resources and divert energy from what we want >>>> to achieve. Maybe at a later stage (and with too much funding coming >>>> in) this may make sense, right now I do not really see the need (or >>>> funding or volunteers). >>>> >>>> Having responsible and thoroughly "Open Source" educated people act >>>> as OSGeo liaison officer totally makes sense (as suggested Venka, >>>> Helena). >>>> >>>> Which option does this best map to? Not sure, seems like 2 would make >>>> more sense? I do believe that option 1 and 1b look like OSGeo is >>>> trying to "grab a hold of" Geo4All. Instead I would like to see us >>>> "let go of it" and at the same time have the confidence that it will >>>> always stick with OSGeo's mission, because there is solid involvement >>>> from OSGeo folks and simply because our Open Source software is the >>>> core asset for the labs. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Arnulf >>>> >>>> On 18.11.2015 08:01, Suchith Anand wrote: >>>> >>>> Thanks Jeff, Charlie, Venka, Jeroen for your inputs and ideas. I am >>>> sure with the combined wisdom of everyone , we will find the best >>>> solution. >>>> As Charlie said we can keep promoting OSGeo and all OSGeo official >>>> projects and keep partnership with educational (and research) >>>> efforts with other open projects (who might one day join OSGeo). We >>>> need to keep doors of collaborations open as it is key for growth. >>>> >>>> Building Bridges (the theme of FOSS4G Bonn) is very appropriate and >>>> also good point to think for next stage (10th Anniversary) of >>>> OSGeo's growth. >>>> >>>> Best wishes, >>>> Suchith >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> ----- >>>> *From:* GeoForAll-ab [geoforall-ab-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] >>>> on behalf of Jeroen Ticheler [jeroen.tiche...@geocat.net] >>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 18, 2015 6:47 AM >>>> *To:* geoforall...@lists.osgeo.org >>>> *Subject:* Re: [geoforall-ab] IMPORTANT - feedback and vote will be >>>> needed: [Board] geo4all relationship >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> I prefer option 1 as it seems to be the logical next step. However I >>>> would suggest the OSGeo board to not force a big process of change >>>> onto the geo4all committee. This transition could go step by step. >>>> Options 1B and 2 are not optimal I think. >>>> Greeting, >>>> Jeroen >>>> >>>> >>>> Op 18 nov. 2015 om 02:11 heeft Venkatesh Raghavan >>>> <ragha...@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp <mailto:ragha...@media.osaka-cu.ac.jp >>>> het volgende geschreven: >>>> >>>> I prefer Scenario 1 as it reflects more closely to the information >>>> presently available on the OSGeo Website. I think Scenario 1 is less >>>> confusion as it also clarifies the status of former Edu Committee. >>>> >>>> Best >>>> Venka >>>> >>>> On 2015/11/18 6:17, Charles Schweik wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I think I'd like to hear the opinions of others. >>>> >>>> I lean toward 1b and want to keep rules 'lean'. I want to promote >>>> OSGeo and OSGeo official projects, but I also want to make sure we >>>> keep strong partnership with educational (and research) efforts with >>>> other projects like NASA WorldWind. >>>> >>>> But I don't want rules around organization hinder good strong open >>>> geospatial science and education collaboration. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Charlie >>>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Jeff McKenna >>>> <jmcke...@gatewaygeomatics.com wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Suchith, >>>> >>>> I actually wrote option 1b, so I can tell you that this option only >>>> works if the entire GeoForAll initiative agrees to focus on OSGeo as >>>> its education committee. This document was drafted because it seems >>>> that GeoForAll, as great as the initiative is for education, may not >>>> always have OSGeo in their interests (as many GeoForAll members have >>>> stated recently, that they should not be forced to promote OSGeo, >>>> they should have a choice). >>>> Well, this document was created because OSGeo really needs a >>>> committee/existing initiative to always promote OSGeo. >>>> >>>> So option1b can only work if the entire GeoForAll initiative agrees >>>> to always promote OSGeo, as its education "arm" of the foundation. >>>> >>>> So before you overwhelmingly choose option 1b, please realize that >>>> this would mean that GeoForAll would be responsible for always >>>> promoting OSGeo. >>>> >>>> So maybe GeoForAll needs to debate what is actually its focus, is it >>>> OSGeo, or, is it in fact nothing to do with OSGeo, because it >>>> promotes "open" through many different tools and organizations. >>>> >>>> Personally, I want Option 1b, but at the same time, I also want >>>> GeoForAll to realize that the OSGeo foundation needs a >>>> committee/group/initiative to always be out there promoting OSGeo. >>>> If this is a problem, then Option 1b unfortunately will not work. >>>> >>>> I hope this explanation helps. >>>> >>>> -jeff >>>> >>>> On 2015-11-17 4:34 PM, Suchith Anand wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Phillip, >>>> >>>> Yes, if Option 1b gets more votes, then in this scenario Geo4All >>>> would be required to name an officer who would liaise with the OSGeo >>>> Board (as every other OSGeo committee does). >>>> Then my suggestion is that someone who is an OSGeo Board member >>>> (Venka or Helena) is nominated for this role. >>>> >>>> Best wishes, >>>> Suchith >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: Phillip Davis [pda...@delmar.edu] >>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 8:02 PM >>>> To: Suchith Anand; Helena Mitasova; >>>> geoforall...@lists.osgeo.org >>>> Subject: RE: IMPORTANT - feedback and vote will be needed: >>>> [Board] geo4all relationship >>>> >>>> Looks like 1a provides easiest implementation path and keeps >>>> GeoForAll unique identity. Option 1b provides more autonomy for >>>> GeoForAll, but the requirement for an officer is somewhat >>>> problematic, since that would be more or less permanent and might >>>> entail much footwork? >>>> >>>> My vote is 1a. >>>> >>>> Dr. Phillip Davis >>>> Director GeoAcademy (http://fossgeo.org) >>>> Professor: Del Mar College Department of Computer >>>> Science-Engineering-Advanced Technology Program Lead: >>>> Geographic Information System & Cartography - Geospatial Technology >>>> Program >>>> 101 Baldwin, VB 153 | Corpus Christi, TX 78404 >>>> 361.698.1476 | 361.698.1475 | 361.698.1479 fax pda...@delmar.edu >>>> >>>> ALL THESE WORLDS…ARE YOURS…EXCEPT TEXAS…ATTEMPT NO LANDING THERE >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: GeoForAll-ab >>>> [mailto:geoforall-ab-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Suchith >>>> Anand >>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 1:05 PM >>>> To: Helena Mitasova; geoforall...@lists.osgeo.org >>>> Subject: Re: [geoforall-ab] IMPORTANT - feedback and vote will be >>>> needed: >>>> [Board] geo4all relationship >>>> >>>> Thanks Helena. Please all AB members provide feedback and vote on >>>> their choice of scenario by 30th Nov 2015. >>>> >>>> Also Regional Chairs please inform your views on Regional chairs >>>> being constituted within the OSGeo Foundation structure if there is a >>>> majority vote for Scenario 1? Yes/No >>>> >>>> Best wishes, >>>> Suchith >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: Helena Mitasova [hmit...@ncsu.edu] >>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 2:41 PM >>>> To: geoforall...@lists.osgeo.org >>>> Cc: Suchith Anand >>>> Subject: IMPORTANT - feedback and vote will be needed: [Board] >>>> geo4all relationship >>>> >>>> Suchith, >>>> >>>> thanks for presenting the GeoForAll OSGeo Relationship < >>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GeoForAll_OSGeo_Relationshipdocument to >>>> the community. >>>> I noticed that the link to the actual document was somewhat buried in >>>> the forwarded email where it could be overlooked. >>>> I am resending it at least for the advisory board because after >>>> discussion a decision and vote on one of the options (perhaps with >>>> some revisions) will be needed. >>>> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GeoForAll_OSGeo_Relationship >>>> >>>> Helena >>>> >>>> On Nov 17, 2015, at 7:19 AM, Suchith Anand < >>>> suchith.an...@nottingham.ac.ukwrote: >>>> >>>> Thanks Jody . I have added more details into the wiki and forwarding >>>> to Geo4All advisory Board and community. >>>> >>>> Dear Geo4All Advisory Board and Regional chairs, >>>> >>>> Recently there had been discussions on the future directions for >>>> Geo4All .There were different opinions and hence we arranged a >>>> meeting at Como to discuss this and find a way forward. Following lot >>>> of discussions among our members in our mail lists etc and the >>>> meeting at Como[1] that was led by Charlie Schweik ,the consensus was >>>> that OSGeo Education and Curriculum Committee and GeoForAll are the >>>> same and it is now GeoForAll: >>>> OSGeo's Education and Curriculum Effort as reflected in OSGeo website >>>> at http://www.osgeo.org/education . Venka has also presented this >>>> outcomes at FOSS4G Seoul [2]. Geo4All will continue to be inclusive >>>> and include all partners that OSGeo Board have MOUs with for >>>> expanding this OSGeo' Geo4All education initiative and warmly welcome >>>> everyone who are following the principles. >>>> >>>> Geo4All initiative was started with the key aim to build up OSGeo's >>>> education aims by collaborating with like minded organisations and it >>>> is one of the most successful initiatives that we have undertaken. >>>> OSGeo Board has made separate MoUs with both ICA and ISPRS for >>>> expanding Geo4All and universities,SMEs, government organisations etc >>>> worldwide have trusted the MoUs that OSGeo provided and setup labs >>>> and joined the network , so it is important we provide strong >>>> continuity and focus. >>>> MoUs have to be respected and the momentum created need to build upon >>>> with clear direction and focus. >>>> >>>> It is important that proper structures are in place and steps need to >>>> be taken to ensure the smooth transition to GeoForAll as OSGeo's >>>> Education and keep collaborating with ICA, ISPRS and other >>>> organisations that OSGeo has MoU with. This will also make sure the >>>> efforts put in by lot of volunteers for this is build upon for the >>>> future. >>>> >>>> Geo4All had been working hard to expand OSGeo education activities >>>> globally .Members have been running courses,training events,workshops >>>> using OSGeo software, MOOC programs (that benefitted thousands of >>>> students >>>> globally) etc have raised OSGeo education efforts globally. >>>> Geo4All members have been actively contributing to OSGeo Curriculum >>>> development effort and will continue to expand this by having more >>>> course materials in various OSGeo software added to the OSGeo >>>> education repository for everyone to make use of for their teaching >>>> and education. >>>> >>>> We will welcome and include all partners that OSGeo Board have MOUs >>>> with for expanding this OSGeo' Geo4All education initiative and >>>> warmly welcome everyone who are following the principles. That way >>>> the OSGeo Board will be able to keep expanding the initiative and to >>>> make MoUs with other organisations etc as we are doing now (ICA, >>>> ISPRS) and also in future . >>>> >>>> So steps need to be taken to ensure the smooth transition to >>>> GeoForAll as OSGeo's Education and keep collaborating with ICA, ISPRS >>>> and other organisations that OSGeo has MoU with. >>>> This will also make sure the efforts put in by lot of volunteers >>>> for this is build upon for the future. >>>> >>>> There are some steps that are outlined below and looking through the >>>> options - Scenario 1 seems to be best option based on the Como >>>> discussions for ensure the smooth transition to GeoForAll as OSGeo's >>>> Education and keep collaborating with ICA, ISPRS and other >>>> organisations that OSGeo has MoU with. >>>> >>>> In this case, the Geo4All Advisory Board would include >>>> representatives from our partners like ICA, ISPRS etc. Geo4All >>>> Advisory Board comprises of representatives from ICA, ISPRS, OSGeo >>>> and other organisations that join in future. As a partner in the >>>> Geo4All initiative, a Project Steering Committee (PSC) comprising of >>>> VP OSGeo Foundation (Education and Curriculum >>>> Project) and other representatives (e.g Regional Chairs of >>>> Geo4All) need to be constituted within the OSGeo Foundation. >>>> The PSC could liaise with Geo4All Advisory Board to evolve way and >>>> means to achieve mutual goals and objectives. >>>> >>>> Charlie Schweik as VP OSGeo Foundation (Education and Curriculum >>>> Project) and other representatives (e.g Regional Chairs of Geo4All) >>>> please let us know if you are happy to being constituted within the >>>> OSGeo Foundation structure? >>>> >>>> May i request all AB members and Regional Chairs to also send their >>>> suggestions on this, so we can move forward. It is important that >>>> proper structures are in place and steps need to be taken to ensure >>>> the smooth transition to GeoForAll as OSGeo's Education and keep >>>> collaborating with ICA, ISPRS and other organisations that OSGeo has >>>> MoU with. This will also make sure the efforts put in by lot of >>>> volunteers for this is built upon for the future. >>>> Please send your inputs before 30th Nov 2015 .Thanks. >>>> >>>> Best wishes, >>>> Suchith >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G_EU_Como_2015_Preconference_meeting >>>> >>>> [2] http://www.slideshare.net/VenkateshRaghavan1/g4-a-newver2 >>>> >>>> >>>> From: Board [board-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] on behalf of Jody Garnett >>>> [jody.garn...@gmail.com] >>>> Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 4:25 PM >>>> To: bo...@lists.osgeo.org >>>> Subject: [Board] geo4all relationship >>>> >>>> I have added an entry to our wiki for: >>>> >>>> Revised Education Committee mandate pending clarification of >>>> GeoForAll OSGeo Relationship with Geo4All advisory board >>>> >>>> Venkatesh Raghavan and Jeff McKenna are our representatives on the >>>> GeoForAll advisory board. >>>> >>>> Thank you for taking on what is an important relationship for our >>>> foundation objectives. >>>> -- >>>> Jody Garnett >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> GeoForAll-ab mailing list >>>> geoforall...@lists.osgeo.org >>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geoforall-ab >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 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-l...@lists.osgeo.org >>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ica-osgeo-labs >>> -- >>> Cameron Shorter, >>> Software and Data Solutions Manager >>> LISAsoft >>> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf, >>> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009 >>> >>> P +61 2 9009 5000, W www.lisasoft.com, F +61 2 9009 5099 >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ica-osgeo-labs mailing list >>> ica-osgeo-l...@lists.osgeo.org >>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ica-osgeo-labs >> -- >> Cameron Shorter, >> Software and Data Solutions Manager >> LISAsoft >> Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf, >> 26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009 >> >> P +61 2 9009 5000, W www.lisasoft.com, F +61 2 9009 5099 >> > _______________________________________________ Live-demo mailing list Live-demo@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/live-demo http://live.osgeo.org http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc
