Difference between revisions of "Board Meeting 2006 05 05"
m (Reverted edit of Eb7A8c, changed back to last version by Rich steele) |
m (Ninth Board Meeting moved to Board Meeting 2006 05 05) |
||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 55: | Line 55: | ||
ADJOURNMENT | ADJOURNMENT | ||
+ | |||
+ | [[Category: Board]] |
Latest revision as of 05:16, 23 July 2008
The 9th board meeting is planned for Friday, May 5th, 2006 at 15:00 UTC (fixedtime), by phone and IRC (#osgeo) at the same time.
From Skype call : +99038275318640
To use a regular phone:
From the US: call # 1-419-753-7120 (free, long distance costs apply). From the UK: call # 0870-119-2350 (10p/minute).
Your Conference Room Number is: 5318640.
Agenda
- Appoint meeting chairperson and secretary.
- Review and approve prior meeting minutes
- Discuss and adopt Committee Guidelines
- Hammer out details of Face to Face Meeting Summer 2006.
- Start work on a budget, assign lead role.
- Delegate someone (ideally a board member) to be contact person / sender for Response to RFI for US Gov GeoSpatial
Minutes
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE OPEN SOURCE GEOSPATIAL FOUNDATION A Delaware non-stock corporation
On May 5, 2006, at 8:00 am Pacific time, pursuant to notice duly given, the Board of Directors (the "Board") of the Open Source Geospatial Foundation (the "Foundation" or "OSGeo") held a meeting by teleconference.
Present at the meeting were the following members of the Board: Chris Holmes, Dave McIllhagga, Markus Neteler, Frank Warmerdam, and Mark Lucas. Arnulf Christl and Venkatesh Raghavan participated by IRC. Directors Jo Walsh and Gary Lang did not attend the meeting. Also present at the request of the Board were Daniel Brookshier, VP Website Committee, and Rich Steele, legal counsel and secretary to the Foundation. All participants on the call indicated that they could hear one another. Additionally, Internet Relay Chat was used for backup purposes (#osgeo on irc.freenode.net). Mr. Warmerdam was appointed chairperson of the meeting. Finding a quorum present, Mr. Warmerdam called the meeting to order. Rich Steele was appointed secretary of the meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Board first approved by general consent the minutes of the meeting held on April 28, 2006.
FACE TO FACE MEETING
The board next discussed the possibility of conducting 1-2 days of meetings in June. It was suggested that meeting the Sunday and/or Monday before the Where 2.0 conference in the SF Bay Area would probably be best (the conference starts on Tuesday). Mr. Warmerdam indicated that he would create a wiki page to discuss topics and attendance for the meeting. In particular, it was suggested that the meeting be used as a session to evaluate projects in incubation (for graduation), considering new projects for incubation, sponsorship/fundraising, and visibility/PR issues.
BUDGETING/FUNDRAISING
This topic was tabled due to Gary Lang's absence.
RFI FOR GOVERNMENT GEOSPATIAL
OSGeo is working on a response to the US Gov't RFI around geospatial technologies. The board discussed the issue of "approving" as offical OSGeo position any response to the RFI. Chris Holmes volunteered to be contact point for the Board of Directors on this project. Frank Warmerdam made a motion, subsequently approved, that the RFI response to go out under the OSGeo name would first be submitted to the board with a brief opportunity to comment, and failing any objection, would go out.
COMMITTEES AND OFFICERS
The board next discussed the status of certain committees and officers, and questions were asked of Rich Steele relating to the authority of OSGeo officers. Mr. Steele responded to the questions and it was then resolved that he would prepare some basic guidelines to delineate the scope of the officers' authority.
COMMITTEE GUIDELINES
This topic was tabled due to the absence of Jo Walsh.
LOGO CONTEST
Daniel Brookshier gave an update on the OSGeo logo contest. The board discussed working to a graphic designer (Autodesk marketing department) to make further revisions to the winning submission to make it more professional, and also conduct some legal due diligence to ensure that there are no trademark issues with the proposed logo.
ADJOURNMENT