Paolo Cavallini wrote: > http://www.linkedin.com/e/vaq/7776133/55322/7269457/view_disc/ I > would appreciate if somebody from OSGeo could jump in the discussion > - it may get rather pointless, but leaving such FUD around without a > reply will not be good IMHO.
Paolo, I have wasted 10 minutes to compile and post my reply. I understand your frustration, but I'm afraid responding to such pointless and shallow voices is a waste of time. It is sad to observe that some people occupying fairly serious positions are spreading nonsenses around and at the same time they present no interest in deeper consideration or at least understanding of subjects they are discussing in details. If a methodology is properly set, one can discuss any nonsense in science paper and nobody should blame him. If methodology is screwed at the beginning, even if the thesis discusses sensible subject, it will be rubbish. I see no methodical approach in some voices from the discussion in OGC group on LinkedIn above. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net Charter Member of OSGeo, http://osgeo.org _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss