El 01/08/12 17:09, José Antonio Canalejo Alonso escribió:
Hello Jorge,
gvSIG was born without trademarks [1]. The owners of the copyright are
now different than the ones at the beginning of the project. Things
have changed a lot since the gvSIG incubator application request was
sent to OSGeo [1]. This link should be actualized and the actual
situation of gvSIG should be new exposed: names of all official
committers, relationships with commercial companies or products,
patents, trademarks, copyright, people actively contribute (code,
documentation, other?), actual sponsors, etc
These changes about trademarks were never notified in this list. My
apologies if the name of the project is creating confusion. gvSIG CE
was created as many other projects with the name of gvSIG. After the
creation of gvSIG CE, we were informed about the existing trademarks.
Hello José Antonio.
As a former member of the gvSIG Association, its hard for me to believe
you didn't know about the trademark beforehand. And those many other
projects you talk about are mainly extensions and customizations of the
gvSIG project, not complete forks.
In any case, I think its never late to rename the project, or is it
written in stone?
Instead of starting any expensive and painful legal action, we should
keep on working, producing good code like we are making now.
Developers from gvSIG EIEL and gvSIG CE made important contributions
to gvSIG 1.10, 1.11 and 1.12.
Let's keep working together in different repositories. We are more
effective and faster now than following the official procedures. More
contributions will come from gvSIG CE Team to gvSIG 1x.
Otherwise, you have announced, the gvSIG Association will invest its
resources in gvSIG 2x. Let us then develop in peace gvSIG 1x. and
integrate SEXTANTE there as it should be done. No matter of we are
official or not. Do not try to make official a community, this will
never work.
Best regards!
Jose
I don't know what you are talking about. First of all you mention gvSIG
EIEL developers like having something to do with the gvSIG CE project or
not related to the gvSIG project. But the gvSIG EIEL project is a gvSIG
official one, the organizations that develop and promote it are members
or collaborate with the gvSIG Association, and some of the developers
are maintainers of the gvSIG official code or even belong to the gvSIG
TSC board. Of course they contribute to gvSIG, they are PART of it.
You also mention a gvSIG Association announcement about investing its
resources in gvSIG 2. But, who do you think is investing in gvSIG 1.12?
I really appreciate the patches you are submitting, but it has nothing
to do with all the effort involved developing gvSIG 1.12, as well as the
work made by non developers: testing, translations, user manual,
spreading, etc. All of this of course with the help and support of the
gvSIG community.
And finally, could you please explain what are those procedures you talk
about and why they are so slow and ineffective? You talk about having to
sign a CLA, sending patches in tickets and being reviewed by the
maintainers? Those and any other procedures are there for a reason. Many
of the big and successful open source projects have procedures, usually
much more stricter than the gvSIG ones. Take a look, for example, at
projects like the linux kernel, eclipse, android, etc. to see what I'm
talking about.
In any case, you are free to have the code wherever you want. But please
try not to confuse the gvSIG users as much as possible, and let us
develope gvSIG 1x, 2x, ... whatever in peace.
Regards.
--
Cèsar Ordiñana Navarro
gvSIG software architect
DiSiD Technologies (http://www.disid.com)
_______________________________________________
Gvsig_internacional mailing list
Gvsig_internacional@listserv.gva.es
To see the archives, edit your preferences or unsubscribe from this mailing
list, please access this url:
http://listserv.gva.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gvsig_internacional
