From kitplummer at dozersoftware.com Fri Oct 16 16:53:44 2009 From: kitplummer at dozersoftware.com (Kit Plummer) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 14:53:44 -0700 Subject: [military-wg] First Post! Message-ID: <4467EACA-7CBC-479B-AC19-82A2BC3350E1@dozersoftware.com> I think I've done it. Hey Mil-OSS/OSA-military-wg Crew. Kit From xm4nmintlinux at gmail.com Sat Oct 17 20:43:50 2009 From: xm4nmintlinux at gmail.com (Xavier Naldo) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2009 20:43:50 -0500 Subject: [military-wg] post permission Message-ID: <46b3f0740910171843t302d6782ja6d073b0c0612a63@mail.gmail.com> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simplehuman at gmail.com Sun Oct 18 20:23:36 2009 From: simplehuman at gmail.com (Joshua L. Davis) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 21:23:36 -0400 Subject: [military-wg] First Post! In-Reply-To: <4467EACA-7CBC-479B-AC19-82A2BC3350E1@dozersoftware.com> References: <4467EACA-7CBC-479B-AC19-82A2BC3350E1@dozersoftware.com> Message-ID: <28c12eec0910181823y4a7d7766tc69168dbf8f3395e@mail.gmail.com> Yo...I might be the only one out here :) We should discuss converging our activities? -Josh On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Kit Plummer wrote: > I think I've done it. > > Hey Mil-OSS/OSA-military-wg Crew. > > Kit > > > > _______________________________________________ > military-wg mailing list > military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org > http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg > -- Joshua L. Davis 678.831.0182 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kitplummer at dozersoftware.com Sun Oct 18 21:34:10 2009 From: kitplummer at dozersoftware.com (Kit Plummer) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 19:34:10 -0700 Subject: [military-wg] First Post! In-Reply-To: <28c12eec0910181823y4a7d7766tc69168dbf8f3395e@mail.gmail.com> References: <4467EACA-7CBC-479B-AC19-82A2BC3350E1@dozersoftware.com> <28c12eec0910181823y4a7d7766tc69168dbf8f3395e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Yep, that'd probably make sense...depending on the objectives of the groups. -- Dozer Software Kit Plummer 520.360.4729 On Oct 18, 2009, at 6:23 PM, Joshua L. Davis wrote: > Yo...I might be the only one out here :) > > We should discuss converging our activities? > > -Josh > > On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Kit Plummer > wrote: > I think I've done it. > > Hey Mil-OSS/OSA-military-wg Crew. > > Kit > > > > _______________________________________________ > military-wg mailing list > military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org > http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg > > > > -- > Joshua L. Davis > 678.831.0182 From ortelius at gmail.com Sun Oct 18 22:02:26 2009 From: ortelius at gmail.com (Jeffrey Johnson) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:02:26 -0700 Subject: [military-wg] First Post! In-Reply-To: References: <4467EACA-7CBC-479B-AC19-82A2BC3350E1@dozersoftware.com> <28c12eec0910181823y4a7d7766tc69168dbf8f3395e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Ok, I will jump in here too. I was under the impression that Josh and Scott were the key players in the Mil section of the OS4A group? Jeff On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Kit Plummer wrote: > Yep, that'd probably make sense...depending on the objectives of the groups. > -- > > Dozer Software > Kit Plummer > 520.360.4729 > > On Oct 18, 2009, at 6:23 PM, Joshua L. Davis wrote: > >> Yo...I might be the only one out here :) >> >> We should discuss converging our activities? >> >> -Josh >> >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Kit Plummer >> wrote: >> I think I've done it. >> >> Hey Mil-OSS/OSA-military-wg Crew. >> >> Kit >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> military-wg mailing list >> military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org >> http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg >> >> >> >> -- >> Joshua L. Davis >> 678.831.0182 > > > _______________________________________________ > military-wg mailing list > military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org > http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg > From ortelius at gmail.com Sun Oct 18 22:09:02 2009 From: ortelius at gmail.com (Jeffrey Johnson) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:09:02 -0700 Subject: [military-wg] Crabgrass Message-ID: Hi Guys, I've been evaluating crabgrass [1] and redmine [2] this weekend for a personal project I am working on. Setting up some combo of the two of these and doing some customization/integration may be a good way to get the MIL-OSS community up and running on a set of open source software that we can all use to collaborate etc ... in addition to forge.mil I suppose? [1] https://labs.riseup.net/crabgrass/documentation/ ... The anarchists that wrote this may be a little disturbed by our use of it, but its really good software [2] http://www.redmine.org/ I'm willing to set this up for use by the group if at least one other person can contribute some time and energy ... Kit? Jeff From kitplummer at dozersoftware.com Sun Oct 18 22:36:56 2009 From: kitplummer at dozersoftware.com (Kit Plummer) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:36:56 -0700 Subject: [military-wg] Crabgrass In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <79D4B67E-76E1-499E-9DE3-0A7C26AACFCF@dozersoftware.com> What's the point of setting one of these up versus using one of the publicly available repositories? I use Redmine for a few different situations, which does provide a level of control. I really like Redmine's ability to accommodate the different VCSes. But, for me it is just a way to firewall the code. I have to admit I'm not for standing up our repos. But, perhaps I'm just enamored with Github and Bitbucket already. Even Project Kenai is an attractive option. Just my HO. :) Kit On Oct 18, 2009, at 8:09 PM, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: > Hi Guys, > > I've been evaluating crabgrass [1] and redmine [2] this weekend for a > personal project I am working on. Setting up some combo of the two of > these and doing some customization/integration may be a good way to > get the MIL-OSS community up and running on a set of open source > software that we can all use to collaborate etc ... in addition to > forge.mil I suppose? > > [1] https://labs.riseup.net/crabgrass/documentation/ ... The > anarchists that wrote this may be a little disturbed by our use of it, > but its really good software > [2] http://www.redmine.org/ > > I'm willing to set this up for use by the group if at least one other > person can contribute some time and energy ... Kit? > > Jeff > > _______________________________________________ > military-wg mailing list > military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org > http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg > From ortelius at gmail.com Sun Oct 18 22:51:13 2009 From: ortelius at gmail.com (Jeffrey Johnson) Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 20:51:13 -0700 Subject: [military-wg] Crabgrass In-Reply-To: <79D4B67E-76E1-499E-9DE3-0A7C26AACFCF@dozersoftware.com> References: <79D4B67E-76E1-499E-9DE3-0A7C26AACFCF@dozersoftware.com> Message-ID: <7246766242805799392@unknownmsgid> I'm all for github and bitbucket, just quite a leap from forge.mil to these and this kind of this could be an intermediate step? As for crabgrass, we could use some thing more sophisticated than google groups I think? Jeff On Oct 18, 2009, at 20:36, Kit Plummer wrote: > What's the point of setting one of these up versus using one of the > publicly available repositories? > > I use Redmine for a few different situations, which does provide a > level of control. I really like Redmine's ability to accommodate > the different VCSes. But, for me it is just a way to firewall the > code. > > I have to admit I'm not for standing up our repos. But, perhaps I'm > just enamored with Github and Bitbucket already. Even Project Kenai > is an attractive option. Just my HO. :) > > Kit > > On Oct 18, 2009, at 8:09 PM, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: > >> Hi Guys, >> >> I've been evaluating crabgrass [1] and redmine [2] this weekend for a >> personal project I am working on. Setting up some combo of the two of >> these and doing some customization/integration may be a good way to >> get the MIL-OSS community up and running on a set of open source >> software that we can all use to collaborate etc ... in addition to >> forge.mil I suppose? >> >> [1] https://labs.riseup.net/crabgrass/documentation/ ... The >> anarchists that wrote this may be a little disturbed by our use of >> it, >> but its really good software >> [2] http://www.redmine.org/ >> >> I'm willing to set this up for use by the group if at least one other >> person can contribute some time and energy ... Kit? >> >> Jeff >> >> _______________________________________________ >> military-wg mailing list >> military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org >> http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg >> > From ortelius at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 09:14:17 2009 From: ortelius at gmail.com (Jeffrey Johnson) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:14:17 -0700 Subject: [military-wg] Fwd: First Post! In-Reply-To: References: <4467EACA-7CBC-479B-AC19-82A2BC3350E1@dozersoftware.com> <28c12eec0910181823y4a7d7766tc69168dbf8f3395e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Reply to list doesnt appear to be working properly? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: John Scott Date: Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 6:45 AM Subject: Re: [military-wg] First Post! To: Jeffrey Johnson yep and add Gunnar as well my general thoughts about what this group is about 1. People: meet/find like-minded folk in the MIL_OSS space that are trying and using OSS to meet mission needs 2. Process: discover, help avoid and 'fix' roadblocks to using OSS 3. Technology: help congregate around existing OSS tech and help foster potentially new OSS propojest (like the logo service). Hell maybe even try to gin up funding for a few things thoughts? js On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: > > Ok, I will jump in here too. I was under the impression that Josh and > Scott were the key players in the Mil section of the OS4A group? > > Jeff > > On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Kit Plummer > wrote: > > Yep, that'd probably make sense...depending on the objectives of the groups. > > -- > > > > Dozer Software > > Kit Plummer > > 520.360.4729 > > > > On Oct 18, 2009, at 6:23 PM, Joshua L. Davis wrote: > > > >> Yo...I might be the only one out here :) > >> > >> We should discuss converging our activities? > >> > >> -Josh > >> > >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Kit Plummer > >> wrote: > >> I think I've done it. > >> > >> Hey Mil-OSS/OSA-military-wg Crew. > >> > >> Kit > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> military-wg mailing list > >> military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org > >> http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Joshua L. Davis > >> 678.831.0182 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > military-wg mailing list > > military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org > > http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg > > > > _______________________________________________ > military-wg mailing list > military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org > http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ John Scott < johnmscott at mindspring.com > < ? ? jms3rd at gmail.com ? ? ?> ph 240.401.6574 From jms3rd at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 09:34:13 2009 From: jms3rd at gmail.com (John Scott) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 10:34:13 -0400 Subject: [military-wg] First Post! In-Reply-To: References: <4467EACA-7CBC-479B-AC19-82A2BC3350E1@dozersoftware.com> <28c12eec0910181823y4a7d7766tc69168dbf8f3395e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: yep and add Gunnar as well my general thoughts about what this group is about 1. People: meet/find like-minded folk in the MIL_OSS space that are trying and using OSS to meet mission needs 2. Process: discover, help avoid and 'fix' roadblocks to using OSS 3. Technology: help congregate around existing OSS tech and help foster potentially new OSS propojest (like the logo service). Hell maybe even try to gin up funding for a few things thoughts? js On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Jeffrey Johnson wrote: > Ok, I will jump in here too. I was under the impression that Josh and > Scott were the key players in the Mil section of the OS4A group? > > Jeff > > On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Kit Plummer > wrote: > > Yep, that'd probably make sense...depending on the objectives of the > groups. > > -- > > > > Dozer Software > > Kit Plummer > > 520.360.4729 > > > > On Oct 18, 2009, at 6:23 PM, Joshua L. Davis wrote: > > > >> Yo...I might be the only one out here :) > >> > >> We should discuss converging our activities? > >> > >> -Josh > >> > >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Kit Plummer > >> wrote: > >> I think I've done it. > >> > >> Hey Mil-OSS/OSA-military-wg Crew. > >> > >> Kit > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> military-wg mailing list > >> military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org > >> http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Joshua L. Davis > >> 678.831.0182 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > military-wg mailing list > > military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org > > http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg > > > > _______________________________________________ > military-wg mailing list > military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org > http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg > -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ John Scott < johnmscott at mindspring.com > < jms3rd at gmail.com > ph 240.401.6574 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kitplummer at dozersoftware.com Mon Oct 19 09:38:00 2009 From: kitplummer at dozersoftware.com (Kit Plummer) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:38:00 -0700 Subject: [military-wg] [mil-oss] Re: First Post! In-Reply-To: References: <4467EACA-7CBC-479B-AC19-82A2BC3350E1@dozersoftware.com> <28c12eec0910181823y4a7d7766tc69168dbf8f3395e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Sounds like it might make sense to consume the Mil-OSS workings under this OSA working group. Maybe make the second Mil-OSS event the first OSA Military-WG event. :) Kit On Oct 19, 2009, at 7:34 AM, John Scott wrote: > yep and add Gunnar as well > my general thoughts about what this group is about > 1. People: meet/find like-minded folk in the MIL_OSS space that are > trying and using OSS to meet mission needs > 2. Process: discover, help avoid and 'fix' roadblocks to using OSS > 3. Technology: help congregate around existing OSS tech and help > foster potentially new OSS propojest (like the logo service). Hell > maybe even try to gin up funding for a few things > > thoughts? > js > > On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Jeffrey Johnson > wrote: > Ok, I will jump in here too. I was under the impression that Josh and > Scott were the key players in the Mil section of the OS4A group? > > Jeff > > On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Kit Plummer > wrote: > > Yep, that'd probably make sense...depending on the objectives of > the groups. > > -- > > > > Dozer Software > > Kit Plummer > > 520.360.4729 > > > > On Oct 18, 2009, at 6:23 PM, Joshua L. Davis wrote: > > > >> Yo...I might be the only one out here :) > >> > >> We should discuss converging our activities? > >> > >> -Josh > >> > >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Kit Plummer > >> wrote: > >> I think I've done it. > >> > >> Hey Mil-OSS/OSA-military-wg Crew. > >> > >> Kit > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> military-wg mailing list > >> military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org > >> http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military- > wg > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Joshua L. Davis > >> 678.831.0182 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > military-wg mailing list > > military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org > > http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg > > > > _______________________________________________ > military-wg mailing list > military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org > http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg > > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > John Scott > < johnmscott at mindspring.com > > < jms3rd at gmail.com > > ph 240.401.6574 > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Military Open Source Software" group. > To post to this group, send email to mil-oss at googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mil-oss+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mil-oss?hl=en > -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- > From scott.schwab at gmail.com Mon Oct 19 09:58:07 2009 From: scott.schwab at gmail.com (Scott Schwab) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:58:07 -0500 Subject: [military-wg] [mil-oss] Re: First Post! In-Reply-To: References: <4467EACA-7CBC-479B-AC19-82A2BC3350E1@dozersoftware.com> <28c12eec0910181823y4a7d7766tc69168dbf8f3395e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: My 2 cents, Something I would hope to learn would be success stories of OSS by the military and its contractors. One of the roadblocks to get through, when pushing for OSS use, is the customer's fear that they will be the first one to try it. If they know of similar organizations have had success, it can reduce the fear. Another bit of useful information would be to identify specs, standards, etc. which OSS packages support. We know the customer this group is targeting loves its standards. If a product can produce in a standard format, it saves them having to write the output product spec as well as any interface documents to their customers. It is easy for them to write a contract that just says "support MIL-SPEC-XYZ". Scott S. On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 9:38 AM, Kit Plummer wrote: > Sounds like it might make sense to consume the Mil-OSS workings under this > OSA working group. Maybe make the second Mil-OSS event the first OSA > Military-WG event. :) > > Kit > > > On Oct 19, 2009, at 7:34 AM, John Scott wrote: > > yep and add Gunnar as well >> my general thoughts about what this group is about >> 1. People: meet/find like-minded folk in the MIL_OSS space that are trying >> and using OSS to meet mission needs >> 2. Process: discover, help avoid and 'fix' roadblocks to using OSS >> 3. Technology: help congregate around existing OSS tech and help foster >> potentially new OSS propojest (like the logo service). Hell maybe even try >> to gin up funding for a few things >> >> thoughts? >> js >> >> On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Jeffrey Johnson >> wrote: >> Ok, I will jump in here too. I was under the impression that Josh and >> Scott were the key players in the Mil section of the OS4A group? >> >> Jeff >> >> On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Kit Plummer >> wrote: >> > Yep, that'd probably make sense...depending on the objectives of the >> groups. >> > -- >> > >> > Dozer Software >> > Kit Plummer >> > 520.360.4729 >> > >> > On Oct 18, 2009, at 6:23 PM, Joshua L. Davis wrote: >> > >> >> Yo...I might be the only one out here :) >> >> >> >> We should discuss converging our activities? >> >> >> >> -Josh >> >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Kit Plummer >> >> wrote: >> >> I think I've done it. >> >> >> >> Hey Mil-OSS/OSA-military-wg Crew. >> >> >> >> Kit >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> military-wg mailing list >> >> military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org >> >> http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Joshua L. Davis >> >> 678.831.0182 >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > military-wg mailing list >> > military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org >> > http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> military-wg mailing list >> military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org >> http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg >> >> >> >> -- >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> John Scott >> < johnmscott at mindspring.com > >> < jms3rd at gmail.com > >> ph 240.401.6574 >> >> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Military Open Source Software" group. >> To post to this group, send email to mil-oss at googlegroups.com >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> mil-oss+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/mil-oss?hl=en >> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > military-wg mailing list > military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org > http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From armonmar at gmail.com Fri Oct 30 01:53:04 2009 From: armonmar at gmail.com (Arturo Montalva) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 23:53:04 -0700 Subject: [military-wg] Benchmarks and FOSS Message-ID: Hi all, My name is Arturo Montalva and I am a blast consultant, hence most of my work is related to structural engineering and military projects. I am also an active follower of open source (mostly during my free time). I think one of the main reasons people (and in particular structural engineers) do not use open source software is because of little information related to testing or validations of the code. I do not mean open source is not tested, however it is not documented. As an active user of open source, I am member of several discussion groups and Internet forums and believe me that these codes are tested every day by very smart and capable people. Would it be interesting to create benchmark problems for structural engineering codes? Thanks -- Arturo http://www.structopen.org/ arturo at structopen.org armonmar at gmail.com From simplehuman at gmail.com Fri Oct 30 05:23:52 2009 From: simplehuman at gmail.com (Joshua L. Davis) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 06:23:52 -0400 Subject: [military-wg] Benchmarks and FOSS In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <28c12eec0910300323l6da867cel124a68d011914c8b@mail.gmail.com> Do you know anyone in academia that does this sort of work already? I work at GaTech and there is a group there that does a huge open source benchmark (DoD only of course) for TMB. I'll mention the idea to them to see if they do. Also, jumpon mil-oss.org - that is another group that will likely merge into this one related to the topic of military open source software. -Josh On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 2:53 AM, Arturo Montalva wrote: > Hi all, > My name is Arturo Montalva and I am a blast consultant, hence most of > my work is related to structural engineering and military projects. I > am also an active follower of open source (mostly during my free > time). > > I think one of the main reasons people (and in particular structural > engineers) do not use open source software is because of little > information related to testing or validations of the code. I do not > mean open source is not tested, however it is not documented. > > As an active user of open source, I am member of several discussion > groups and Internet forums and believe me that these codes are tested > every day by very smart and capable people. > > Would it be interesting to create benchmark problems for structural > engineering codes? > Thanks > > -- > Arturo > http://www.structopen.org/ > arturo at structopen.org > armonmar at gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > military-wg mailing list > military-wg at opensourceforamerica.org > http://opensourceforamerica.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/military-wg > -- Joshua L. Davis 678.831.0182 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: