FOSS4G Reboot 2011 - Revision history

Jmckenna: add category

2010-01-06T19:32:56Z

add category

2009-04-02T20:21:49Z

Observations by Jeff McKenna

2009-04-02T20:18:43Z

Observations by Jeff McKenna

2009-04-02T20:17:51Z

Observations by Jeff McKenna

2009-04-02T20:15:56Z

2009-04-02T20:15:04Z

Observations by Jeff McKenna

2009-04-02T20:13:11Z

2009-04-02T20:02:39Z

Observations by Jeff McKenna

2009-04-02T20:01:39Z

2009-04-02T19:54:30Z

Observations by Peter Batty

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:32, 6 January 2010
Line 57:		Line 57:
	=== D. No changes to the Existing Process ===		=== D. No changes to the Existing Process ===
	* Everything is perfect, no changes are necessary.		* Everything is perfect, no changes are necessary.
		+
		+	[[Category:Conference Committee]]

@@ Line 23: / Line 23: @@
 ** I also support the idea of trying to have a regional event in North America, Europe, and Asia in each regional year
 * What amount of seed funding should the OSGeo Conference Committee request from the board for a budget for these regional and international events?
 * Adding an "Expression of Interest" process and selecting 2 groups for a full proposal ''must'' be implemented

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 * I support the Two Track Strategy, as we clearly need to increase the amount of OSGeo-supported events through the year
 ** I also support the idea of trying to have a regional event in North America, Europe, and Asia in each regional year
-*** What amount of seed funding should the OSGeo Conference Committee request from the board for a budget for these regional events?
+* What amount of seed funding should the OSGeo Conference Committee request from the board for a budget for these regional and international events?
 * Adding an "Expression of Interest" process and selecting 2 groups for a full proposal ''must'' be implemented

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 * I support the Two Track Strategy, as we clearly need to increase the amount of OSGeo-supported events through the year
 ** I also support the idea of trying to have a regional event in North America, Europe, and Asia in each regional year
-*** What amount of funding should the OSGeo Conference Committee request from the board for a budget for these regional events seedings?
+*** What amount of seed funding should the OSGeo Conference Committee request from the board for a budget for these regional events?
 * Adding an "Expression of Interest" process and selecting 2 groups for a full proposal ''must'' be implemented

@@ Line 23: / Line 23: @@
 ** I also support the idea of trying to have a regional event in North America, Europe, and Asia in each regional year
 *** What amount of funding should the OSGeo Conference Committee request from the board for a budget for these regional events seedings?
-* Adding an "Expression of Interest" process and selecting 2 groups for a full proposal must be implemented
+* Adding an "Expression of Interest" process and selecting 2 groups for a full proposal ''must'' be implemented
 == Community Thoughts ==

@@ Line 32: / Line 32: @@
 * we should have a global conference each year which is more of a deep techie conference, and also have various regional conferences which are more focused on outreach, i.e. selling OSGeo to the unconverted.
-== Options for Change ==
+== Options for 2011 ==
 === A. Modified Status Quo ===
@@ Line 52: / Line 52: @@
 * Same as Option A, but OSGeo would also support regional conferences in the same year as the annual conference

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 * I'm leery of the two track approach because to me it means I'll only see the "whole community" once every two years.  But it does have some good aspects.
 * I would also like some contemplation of whether FOSS4G may be tooexpensive, and commercial in approach and whether we could aim for more modest venues and a more community feel (as I understand is the case with FOSSGIS).
 == Community Thoughts ==

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 * There certainly seems to be consensus around having a lightweight "statement of intent" for the global conference, and I support that too
 * I think that OSGeo should consider having a more explicit strategy in terms of location of the global conference - for example, is it a 3 year rotation between Europe, North America, and Rest of the World? We could choose to just leave it up to the selection committee as is done now, but I think it at least merits some discussion - the current decision process is not at all transparent.
 == Options for Change ==