librelist archives

« back to archive

Listing funding costs on GeoNode.org roadmap

Listing funding costs on GeoNode.org roadmap

From:
Date:
2010-06-15 @ 17:40
<html><body>
<p><font size="2">I have talked with Stu some about this and I tend to 
agree with his assessment. I think we shouldn't list the actual spec'd out
ballpark estimate on the geonode.org website. As it is the community 
website for the opensource project, it is of my opinion that it should be 
separate from any actual business deals or funded development on the 
project. i.e. A contract between OpenGeo and the World Bank on the project
is a deal between those two entities even if it is funding OpenGeo's 
contributions to the project. I think it is perfectly fine for OpenGeo to 
list roadmap items on OpenGeo.org that are of interest for development and
the costing estimates, but I think they should be seperate from the 
geonode.org website itself. We can list on the GeoNode.org website the 
different institutions that are contributing to the development of the 
project, and that could link to OpenGeo's GeoNode development page. It 
could discourage individuals/groups contribution to the project via 
non-external funded mechanisms if the project at its core is the 
assumption that all development is funded or funded through a certain 
mechanism. </font><br>
<br>
<font size="2">----<br>
Galen B. Evans<br>
Disaster Risk Management<br>
Latin America & The Caribbean<br>
Sustainable Development Network (SDN)<br>
World Bank<br>
1818 H St. NW  20433<br>
Washington, DC 20433</font></body></html>

Re: [geonode] Listing funding costs on GeoNode.org roadmap

From:
Sebastian Benthall
Date:
2010-06-15 @ 17:46
+1

That makes a lot of sense, especially since different contributing
organizations could potentially be bidding at different rates for the same
work.

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 1:40 PM, <gevans@worldbank.org> wrote:

> <html><body>
> <p><font size="2">I have talked with Stu some about this and I tend to
> agree with his assessment. I think we shouldn't list the actual spec'd out
> ballpark estimate on the geonode.org website. As it is the community
> website for the opensource project, it is of my opinion that it should be
> separate from any actual business deals or funded development on the
> project. i.e. A contract between OpenGeo and the World Bank on the project
> is a deal between those two entities even if it is funding OpenGeo's
> contributions to the project. I think it is perfectly fine for OpenGeo to
> list roadmap items on OpenGeo.org that are of interest for development and
> the costing estimates, but I think they should be seperate from the
> geonode.org website itself. We can list on the GeoNode.org website the
> different institutions that are contributing to the development of the
> project, and that could link to OpenGeo's GeoNode development page. It could
> discourage individuals/groups contribution to the pr
>  oject via non-external funded mechanisms if the project at its core is the
> assumption that all development is funded or funded through a certain
> mechanism. </font><br>
> <br>
> <font size="2">----<br>
> Galen B. Evans<br>
> Disaster Risk Management<br>
> Latin America & The Caribbean<br>
> Sustainable Development Network (SDN)<br>
> World Bank<br>
> 1818 H St. NW  20433<br>
> Washington, DC 20433</font></body></html>
>
>


-- 
Sebastian Benthall
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org

Re: [geonode] Listing funding costs on GeoNode.org roadmap

From:
Chris Holmes
Date:
2010-06-15 @ 18:03
+1, all good reasons.

On 6/15/10 1:46 PM, Sebastian Benthall wrote:
> +1
>
> That makes a lot of sense, especially since different contributing
> organizations could potentially be bidding at different rates for the
> same work.
>
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 1:40 PM, <gevans@worldbank.org
> <mailto:gevans@worldbank.org>> wrote:
>
>     <html><body>
>     <p><font size="2">I have talked with Stu some about this and I tend
>     to agree with his assessment. I think we shouldn't list the actual
>     spec'd out ballpark estimate on the geonode.org <http://geonode.org>
>     website. As it is the community website for the opensource project,
>     it is of my opinion that it should be separate from any actual
>     business deals or funded development on the project. i.e. A contract
>     between OpenGeo and the World Bank on the project is a deal between
>     those two entities even if it is funding OpenGeo's contributions to
>     the project. I think it is perfectly fine for OpenGeo to list
>     roadmap items on OpenGeo.org that are of interest for development
>     and the costing estimates, but I think they should be seperate from
>     the geonode.org <http://geonode.org> website itself. We can list on
>     the GeoNode.org website the different institutions that are
>     contributing to the development of the project, and that could link
>     to OpenGeo's GeoNode development page. It could discourage
>     individuals/groups contribution to the pr
>       oject via non-external funded mechanisms if the project at its
>     core is the assumption that all development is funded or funded
>     through a certain mechanism. </font><br>
>     <br>
>     <font size="2">----<br>
>     Galen B. Evans<br>
>     Disaster Risk Management<br>
>     Latin America & The Caribbean<br>
>     Sustainable Development Network (SDN)<br>
>     World Bank<br>
>     1818 H St. NW  20433<br>
>     Washington, DC 20433</font></body></html>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sebastian Benthall
> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
>