Re: [OSGeo-Standards] OGC XML schemas and FOSS4G softwaredistribution
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Cc: Scott Simmons <email@example.com>, Debian GIS Project <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Standards] OGC XML schemas and FOSS4G softwaredistribution
- From: Sebastiaan Couwenberg <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 20:33:00 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 56575E6C.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] email@example.com>
- References: <CAFWXLWXn0oFju-LPAfSnWBdt91k7g7Azg9pkaO-vYA1NjrHL-A@mail.gmail.com> <CAOhbgA=8zMaReZG+bV946JeOfe4X1Kobyh5=+qnevwhQYFjqHA@mail.gmail.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <CAOhbgAkhH5=ZHHEzeuNRCvn48P6mkDD+4E=2R3BfXWx4XvWwPA@mail.gmail.com> <90C8210E1E0D4FF09779BAA6CDCFA98E@OfficeHP> <CAOhbgAmbmTZjUnPUmGorEer+czm9nmdzNTiBVz0Zg=hDHyGXZQ@mail.gmail.com> <54DE13E7.email@example.com> <alpine.DEB.firstname.lastname@example.org> <CAOhbgAn+n7bjDezSudOHvrJhAkuJffUPiQgDPgTPu9mKPZdSYg@mail.gmail.com> <54E28749.email@example.com> <CAOhbgA=eW1wz=KOma84844_C5ob6dPS=nqDACx2Jq6_p39xLrw@mail.gmail.com> <54E2E367.firstname.lastname@example.org> <CAOhbgAnHKh73-dNC6iyOZqyj6_97dBCf5FMwjg1vQ6keH9YJkA@mail.gmail.com> <54E59177.email@example.com> <0412428A-C4BE-4035-8CEE-51A9531EF00D@opengeospatial.org> <54EB78E5.firstname.lastname@example.org> <[🔎] email@example.com>
On 26-11-15 19:44, Cameron Shorter wrote:
> Hi Scott,
> Here is where I see this conversation stalling (on this list that I
> On 24/02/2015 6:00 am, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>> Hi Scott,
>> On 02/23/2015 05:09 PM, Scott Simmons wrote:
>>> OGC staff have been watching the conversation and we have discussed
>>> internally how we might better meet the needs of this community.
>>> I’ll get our license experts in touch with the FTP Masters this week.
>>> We truly want to do whatever possible to ensure that OGC licensing is
>>> not a hurdle!
>> Thanks for your willingness to join the discussion with the Debian FTP
>> Please keep the OSGeo Standards and Debian GIS lists in the loop.
>> Kind Regards,
> It sounds like it might be worth revisiting, and potentially drawing
> upon relationships we have within OSGeo, UbuntuGIS and DebianGIS to see
> if we can escalate.
I've contacted the FTP master in question today, see:
If I also don't get a reply from any of the FTP masters on that, I can
try to get the discussion going on the debian-legal list, ask advice
from the technical committee, or DPL (project leader). So there are some
more options available.
> I suspect Bas might be able to call on a favour or two, or we might be
> able to call upon the OSGeo Board to reach out.
> Who are the people within OGC to talk with about this?
George Percivall was previously recommended:
> On 26/11/2015 11:13 pm, Scott Simmons wrote:
>> We never heard back from the Debian folks on issues with OGC license
>> terms. I would love to engage them, but admit that I am at a loss as
>> to how to progress!
>> Best Regards.
>> Scott Simmons
>> Executive Director, Standards Program
>> Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC)
>> tel +1 970 682 1922
>> mob +1 970 214 9467
>> firstname.lastname@example.org <mailto:email@example.com>
>> The OGC: Making Location Count…
>> www.opengeospatial.org <http://www.opengeospatial.org>
>>> On Nov 26, 2015, at 12:44 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>>> On 26-11-15 06:56, Cameron Shorter wrote:
>>>> The OGC has technical and planning committee meetings in Sydney (my
>>>> town), next week, 30 Nov - 4 Dec 2016.
>>>> I'm hoping to bump into some of the OGC attendees while in town. (In
>>>> particular there is a GeoRabble event I will be at).
>>>> It might also be a good chance to talk about any OSGeo/OGC
>>>> In particular, is the OGC interested in including the TEAM
>>>> engine on OSGeo-Live? We have just kicked of the build process for
>>>> our next
>>>> release, and now would be an opportune time to discuss including the
>>>> Also, we have previously discussed integrating OGC Standards
>>>> with OSGeo-Live documentation. Is the development of documentation
>>>> of OGC
>>>> standards still progressing?
>>>> It might be a good chance to discuss that too.
>>> If the OGC documentation is licensed under the terms of the OGC Document
>>> Notice this is problematic due to the non-free nature of the license.
>>> I'd like to know if OGC has been able to get in touch with the Debian
>>> project to discuss the issues with the OGC Document & Software notices.
>>> There hasn't been any public progress since this was last discussed on
>>> this list ('OGC XML schemas and FOSS4G software distribution' thread).
GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146 50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1