Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Tales from a Benevolent Dictator

[Sanghee Shin]

Hi Marco and Peter, 

Sorry for my ignorance. However I couldn’t tell the difference between ancient 
greek oracle, Bible and modern science. For me, those things are the same in 
terms that *The Absolute* should/will be conveyed through *Imperfect* human 
however the great virtue/categorical imperative those are though.

Kind regards, 
신상희
---
Shin, Sanghee
Gaia3D, Inc. - The GeoSpatial Company
http://www.gaia3d.com 

> 2016. 5. 15., 오전 10:44, Marco Afonso  작성:
> 
> Hi Marc,
> 
> Software quality is not measured by votes, comunity, marketing, governance 
> models, politics, economical interests, hypes or any other social science.
> 
> Software quality can be measured using comparison tests from a scientific and 
> independent methods.
> 
> Just to say that some positions sound very biased and do not evaluate 
> software using independent methods.
> 
> How do you measure a car quality? By governance models? By comunities? By 
> marketing or hype? By economic potencial? This all sounds very wrong.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Em 15/05/2016 02:22, "Marc Vloemans"  > escreveu:
> Peter,
> 
> With regard to Rob's comments: I conclude that the various commentators have 
> repeatedly pointed out that your line of reasoning is either based on a 
> non-representative and even faulty sample of experiences/examples (eg Jeroen 
> and Rob) or on the software's quality and popularity in certain circles (eg 
> Rob) without clarifying that particular correlation to its project management.
> 
> In scientific terms that means your thesis/argument does not hold up. By the 
> way, citing sources on quality still does not tell anything about above 
> correlation, so spare yourself the effort. And comparing Rasdaman to other 
> OSGeoprojects still makes it an odd-one-out, which no side-stepping the 
> concerns raised can hide.
> 
> Effectively, we seem to be running in circles. But . we are not: all 
> commentators have been quite inviting, but you still cannot convince them 
> with true and relevant reasons. You have even resorted to calling at least me 
> and (hopefully not too many) others along the way 'activists'. Wording that 
> fits lesser democratic countries, organisations and political systems. If 
> that gives an insight into the way you look at and treat 
> stakeholders/community members with a different view from yours, then I fear 
> you have shown our community your true 'colors'/face/intention
> 
> That is not running in circles but straight into the abyss, somewhere 
> in-between OSGeo and Eclipse/LocationTech and other natural allies, in an 
> irrational and suicidal attempt ... to achieve what exactly 
> 
> Vriendelijke groet,
> Marc Vloemans
> 
> 
> Op 14 mei 2016 om 15:00 heeft Rob Emanuele  > het volgende geschreven:
> 
>> Hi Peter,
>> 
>> This is the second time I've heard you defend your position by simply saying 
>> the greatness of the project justifies whatever model you'd like for project 
>> governance, and mention some independent study that claims your software is 
>> "way faster" and "wins all benchmarks". These are bold, general and 
>> unqualified claims that I would greatly like to understand in a more 
>> detailed way. Please site your sources.
>> 
>> Best,
>> Rob
>> 
>> On May 14, 2016 5:43 AM, "Peter Baumann" > > wrote:
>> OpenHub knows 66 code contributors, and they do not even know (and list) all 
>> over time. Hence, cannot see anyone felt discouraged. Typical rasdaman 
>> contributors are interested in design by innovation and not design by 
>> committee, and that community spirit has made rasdaman a leading tool that 
>> wins all benchmarks over GeoServer, SPARK, etc.
>> -Peter
>> 
>> PS: suggesting a fork just because OSGeo follows a narrow principle that 
>> does not accommodate rasdaman makes me frown about the ideals behind :)
>> 
>> 
>> On 05/12/2016 02:57 PM, Ian Turton wrote:
>>> I've been trying to stay out of the arguments about governance models 
>>> because I prefer to write code than worry about licences or governance. But 
>>> it may help if I share a some anecdotes (which is almost data) about a 
>>> couple of FOSS projects that came out of academia when I was in charge. One 
>>> of these you may well have heard of GeoTools, which forms the base library 
>>> of GeoServer, UDig, GeoMesa and others, the other you may not know GeoVista 
>>> Studio. 
>>> 
>>> Both these libraries started out as academic projects that solved a 
>>> research problem, both were open sourced as a result of the university 
>>> claiming all the intellectual property of it's staff for ever (so why not 
>>> give it away?) in both cases I (and James Macgil) were benevolent dictators 
>>> when the projects launched, it was a simple governance model that left us 
>>> able to get on with coding 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Tales from a Benevolent Dictator

[Cameron Shorter]

All,
I think most comments on this thread have been very constructive, 
focusing on the topic rather than the person. Thanks everyone. It aligns 
with our code of conduct [1] which includes:


/"Be empathetic, welcoming, friendly, and patient.//
//We work together to resolve conflict, assume good intentions, and do 
our best to act in an empathetic fashion. We may all experience some 
frustration from time to time, but we do not allow frustration to turn 
into a personal attack. ..."/


[1] http://www.osgeo.org/code_of_conduct

On 15/05/2016 11:22 am, Marc Vloemans wrote:

Peter,

With regard to Rob's comments: I conclude that the various 
commentators have repeatedly pointed out that your line of reasoning 
is either based on a non-representative and even faulty sample of 
experiences/examples (eg Jeroen and Rob) or on the software's quality 
and popularity in certain circles (eg Rob) without clarifying that 
particular correlation to its project management.


In scientific terms that means your thesis/argument does not hold up. 
By the way, citing sources on quality still does not tell anything 
about above correlation, so spare yourself the effort. And comparing 
Rasdaman to other OSGeoprojects still makes it an odd-one-out, which 
no side-stepping the concerns raised can hide.


Effectively, we seem to be running in circles. But . we are not: 
all commentators have been quite inviting, but you still cannot 
convince them with true and relevant reasons. You have even resorted 
to calling at least me and (hopefully not too many) others along the 
way 'activists'. Wording that fits lesser democratic countries, 
organisations and political systems. If that gives an insight into the 
way you look at and treat stakeholders/community members with a 
different view from yours, then I fear you have shown our community 
your true 'colors'/face/intention


That is not running in circles but straight into the abyss, somewhere 
in-between OSGeo and Eclipse/LocationTech and other natural allies, in 
an irrational and suicidal attempt ... to achieve what exactly 


Vriendelijke groet,
Marc Vloemans


Op 14 mei 2016 om 15:00 heeft Rob Emanuele > het volgende geschreven:



Hi Peter,

This is the second time I've heard you defend your position by simply 
saying the greatness of the project justifies whatever model you'd 
like for project governance, and mention some independent study that 
claims your software is "way faster" and "wins all benchmarks". These 
are bold, general and unqualified claims that I would greatly like to 
understand in a more detailed way. Please site your sources.


Best,
Rob

On May 14, 2016 5:43 AM, "Peter Baumann" 
> wrote:


OpenHub knows 66 code contributors, and they do not even know
(and list) all over time. Hence, cannot see anyone felt
discouraged. Typical rasdaman contributors are interested in
design by innovation and not design by committee, and that
community spirit has made rasdaman a leading tool that wins all
benchmarks over GeoServer, SPARK, etc.
-Peter

PS: suggesting a fork just because OSGeo follows a narrow
principle that does not accommodate rasdaman makes me frown about
the ideals behind :)


On 05/12/2016 02:57 PM, Ian Turton wrote:

I've been trying to stay out of the arguments about governance
models because I prefer to write code than worry about licences
or governance. But it may help if I share a some anecdotes
(which is almost data) about a couple of FOSS projects that came
out of academia when I was in charge. One of these you may well
have heard of GeoTools, which forms the base library of
GeoServer, UDig, GeoMesa and others, the other you may not know
GeoVista Studio.

Both these libraries started out as academic projects that
solved a research problem, both were open sourced as a result of
the university claiming all the intellectual property of it's
staff for ever (so why not give it away?) in both cases I (and
James Macgil) were benevolent dictators when the projects
launched, it was a simple governance model that left us able to
get on with coding and researching and meant that things went
the way we wanted. GeoTools started to get some users and people
started asking for bug fixes and new features etc while James &
I had actual jobs to do and wanted to spend time with our
families and go on holiday etc. So we got some more people
involved such as TOPP and Refractions and we sort of lucked into
a PSC and GeoTools went from strength to strength and now has a
PSC that spans the globe (which makes meeting times hard to find
but is otherwise awesome). In fact for a while GeoTools and
GeoServer managed (or thrived) with no input from me or James at
all. However GeoVISTA studio, only 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Tales from a Benevolent Dictator

[Marc VLOEMANS]

Hi Marco

I inferred that software quality was raised in defence of the benevolent
dictatorship governance model. Which IMHO (and obviously yours) bears no
relationship as quality derives from other factors. Apologies if my irony
has been confusing ;-)

Cheers, Marc

Op zondag 15 mei 2016 heeft Marco Afonso  het
volgende geschreven:

> Hi Marc,
>
> Software quality is not measured by votes, comunity, marketing, governance
> models, politics, economical interests, hypes or any other social science.
>
> Software quality can be measured using comparison tests from a scientific
> and independent methods.
>
> Just to say that some positions sound very biased and do not evaluate
> software using independent methods.
>
> How do you measure a car quality? By governance models? By comunities? By
> marketing or hype? By economic potencial? This all sounds very wrong.
>
> Cheers
> Em 15/05/2016 02:22, "Marc Vloemans"  > escreveu:
>
>> Peter,
>>
>> With regard to Rob's comments: I conclude that the various commentators
>> have repeatedly pointed out that your line of reasoning is either based on
>> a non-representative and even faulty sample of experiences/examples (eg
>> Jeroen and Rob) or on the software's quality and popularity in certain
>> circles (eg Rob) without clarifying that particular correlation to its
>> project management.
>>
>> In scientific terms that means your thesis/argument does not hold up. By
>> the way, citing sources on quality still does not tell anything about above
>> correlation, so spare yourself the effort. And comparing Rasdaman to other
>> OSGeoprojects still makes it an odd-one-out, which no side-stepping the
>> concerns raised can hide.
>>
>> Effectively, we seem to be running in circles. But . we are not: all
>> commentators have been quite inviting, but you still cannot convince them
>> with true and relevant reasons. You have even resorted to calling at least
>> me and (hopefully not too many) others along the way 'activists'. Wording
>> that fits lesser democratic countries, organisations and political systems.
>> If that gives an insight into the way you look at and treat
>> stakeholders/community members with a different view from yours, then I
>> fear you have shown our community your true 'colors'/face/intention
>>
>> That is not running in circles but straight into the abyss, somewhere
>> in-between OSGeo and Eclipse/LocationTech and other natural allies, in an
>> irrational and suicidal attempt ... to achieve what exactly 
>>
>> Vriendelijke groet,
>> Marc Vloemans
>>
>>
>> Op 14 mei 2016 om 15:00 heeft Rob Emanuele > > het volgende
>> geschreven:
>>
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> This is the second time I've heard you defend your position by simply
>> saying the greatness of the project justifies whatever model you'd like for
>> project governance, and mention some independent study that claims your
>> software is "way faster" and "wins all benchmarks". These are bold, general
>> and unqualified claims that I would greatly like to understand in a more
>> detailed way. Please site your sources.
>>
>> Best,
>> Rob
>> On May 14, 2016 5:43 AM, "Peter Baumann" > > wrote:
>>
>>> OpenHub knows 66 code contributors, and they do not even know (and list)
>>> all over time. Hence, cannot see anyone felt discouraged. Typical rasdaman
>>> contributors are interested in design by innovation and not design by
>>> committee, and that community spirit has made rasdaman a leading tool that
>>> wins all benchmarks over GeoServer, SPARK, etc.
>>> -Peter
>>>
>>> PS: suggesting a fork just because OSGeo follows a narrow principle that
>>> does not accommodate rasdaman makes me frown about the ideals behind :)
>>>
>>>
>>> On 05/12/2016 02:57 PM, Ian Turton wrote:
>>>
>>> I've been trying to stay out of the arguments about governance models
>>> because I prefer to write code than worry about licences or governance. But
>>> it may help if I share a some anecdotes (which is almost data) about a
>>> couple of FOSS projects that came out of academia when I was in charge. One
>>> of these you may well have heard of GeoTools, which forms the base library
>>> of GeoServer, UDig, GeoMesa and others, the other you may not know GeoVista
>>> Studio.
>>>
>>> Both these libraries started out as academic projects that solved a
>>> research problem, both were open sourced as a result of the university
>>> claiming all the intellectual property of it's staff for ever (so why not
>>> give it away?) in both cases I (and James Macgil) were benevolent dictators
>>> when the projects launched, it was a simple governance model that left us
>>> able to get on with coding and researching and meant that things went the
>>> way we wanted. 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Tales from a Benevolent Dictator

[Marco Afonso]

Hi Marc,

Software quality is not measured by votes, comunity, marketing, governance
models, politics, economical interests, hypes or any other social science.

Software quality can be measured using comparison tests from a scientific
and independent methods.

Just to say that some positions sound very biased and do not evaluate
software using independent methods.

How do you measure a car quality? By governance models? By comunities? By
marketing or hype? By economic potencial? This all sounds very wrong.

Cheers
Em 15/05/2016 02:22, "Marc Vloemans"  escreveu:

> Peter,
>
> With regard to Rob's comments: I conclude that the various commentators
> have repeatedly pointed out that your line of reasoning is either based on
> a non-representative and even faulty sample of experiences/examples (eg
> Jeroen and Rob) or on the software's quality and popularity in certain
> circles (eg Rob) without clarifying that particular correlation to its
> project management.
>
> In scientific terms that means your thesis/argument does not hold up. By
> the way, citing sources on quality still does not tell anything about above
> correlation, so spare yourself the effort. And comparing Rasdaman to other
> OSGeoprojects still makes it an odd-one-out, which no side-stepping the
> concerns raised can hide.
>
> Effectively, we seem to be running in circles. But . we are not: all
> commentators have been quite inviting, but you still cannot convince them
> with true and relevant reasons. You have even resorted to calling at least
> me and (hopefully not too many) others along the way 'activists'. Wording
> that fits lesser democratic countries, organisations and political systems.
> If that gives an insight into the way you look at and treat
> stakeholders/community members with a different view from yours, then I
> fear you have shown our community your true 'colors'/face/intention
>
> That is not running in circles but straight into the abyss, somewhere
> in-between OSGeo and Eclipse/LocationTech and other natural allies, in an
> irrational and suicidal attempt ... to achieve what exactly 
>
> Vriendelijke groet,
> Marc Vloemans
>
>
> Op 14 mei 2016 om 15:00 heeft Rob Emanuele  het
> volgende geschreven:
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> This is the second time I've heard you defend your position by simply
> saying the greatness of the project justifies whatever model you'd like for
> project governance, and mention some independent study that claims your
> software is "way faster" and "wins all benchmarks". These are bold, general
> and unqualified claims that I would greatly like to understand in a more
> detailed way. Please site your sources.
>
> Best,
> Rob
> On May 14, 2016 5:43 AM, "Peter Baumann" 
> wrote:
>
>> OpenHub knows 66 code contributors, and they do not even know (and list)
>> all over time. Hence, cannot see anyone felt discouraged. Typical rasdaman
>> contributors are interested in design by innovation and not design by
>> committee, and that community spirit has made rasdaman a leading tool that
>> wins all benchmarks over GeoServer, SPARK, etc.
>> -Peter
>>
>> PS: suggesting a fork just because OSGeo follows a narrow principle that
>> does not accommodate rasdaman makes me frown about the ideals behind :)
>>
>>
>> On 05/12/2016 02:57 PM, Ian Turton wrote:
>>
>> I've been trying to stay out of the arguments about governance models
>> because I prefer to write code than worry about licences or governance. But
>> it may help if I share a some anecdotes (which is almost data) about a
>> couple of FOSS projects that came out of academia when I was in charge. One
>> of these you may well have heard of GeoTools, which forms the base library
>> of GeoServer, UDig, GeoMesa and others, the other you may not know GeoVista
>> Studio.
>>
>> Both these libraries started out as academic projects that solved a
>> research problem, both were open sourced as a result of the university
>> claiming all the intellectual property of it's staff for ever (so why not
>> give it away?) in both cases I (and James Macgil) were benevolent dictators
>> when the projects launched, it was a simple governance model that left us
>> able to get on with coding and researching and meant that things went the
>> way we wanted. GeoTools started to get some users and people started asking
>> for bug fixes and new features etc while James & I had actual jobs to do
>> and wanted to spend time with our families and go on holiday etc. So we got
>> some more people involved such as TOPP and Refractions and we sort of
>> lucked into a PSC and GeoTools went from strength to strength and now has a
>> PSC that spans the globe (which makes meeting times hard to find but is
>> otherwise awesome). In fact for a while GeoTools and GeoServer managed (or
>> thrived) with no input from me or James at all. However GeoVISTA studio,
>> only went open source grudgingly (the PI's didn't 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Tales from a Benevolent Dictator

[Marc Vloemans]

Peter,

With regard to Rob's comments: I conclude that the various commentators have 
repeatedly pointed out that your line of reasoning is either based on a 
non-representative and even faulty sample of experiences/examples (eg Jeroen 
and Rob) or on the software's quality and popularity in certain circles (eg 
Rob) without clarifying that particular correlation to its project management.

In scientific terms that means your thesis/argument does not hold up. By the 
way, citing sources on quality still does not tell anything about above 
correlation, so spare yourself the effort. And comparing Rasdaman to other 
OSGeoprojects still makes it an odd-one-out, which no side-stepping the 
concerns raised can hide.

Effectively, we seem to be running in circles. But . we are not: all 
commentators have been quite inviting, but you still cannot convince them with 
true and relevant reasons. You have even resorted to calling at least me and 
(hopefully not too many) others along the way 'activists'. Wording that fits 
lesser democratic countries, organisations and political systems. If that gives 
an insight into the way you look at and treat stakeholders/community members 
with a different view from yours, then I fear you have shown our community your 
true 'colors'/face/intention

That is not running in circles but straight into the abyss, somewhere 
in-between OSGeo and Eclipse/LocationTech and other natural allies, in an 
irrational and suicidal attempt ... to achieve what exactly 

Vriendelijke groet,
Marc Vloemans


> Op 14 mei 2016 om 15:00 heeft Rob Emanuele  het 
> volgende geschreven:
> 
> Hi Peter,
> 
> This is the second time I've heard you defend your position by simply saying 
> the greatness of the project justifies whatever model you'd like for project 
> governance, and mention some independent study that claims your software is 
> "way faster" and "wins all benchmarks". These are bold, general and 
> unqualified claims that I would greatly like to understand in a more detailed 
> way. Please site your sources.
> 
> Best,
> Rob
> 
>> On May 14, 2016 5:43 AM, "Peter Baumann"  
>> wrote:
>> OpenHub knows 66 code contributors, and they do not even know (and list) all 
>> over time. Hence, cannot see anyone felt discouraged. Typical rasdaman 
>> contributors are interested in design by innovation and not design by 
>> committee, and that community spirit has made rasdaman a leading tool that 
>> wins all benchmarks over GeoServer, SPARK, etc.
>> -Peter
>> 
>> PS: suggesting a fork just because OSGeo follows a narrow principle that 
>> does not accommodate rasdaman makes me frown about the ideals behind :)
>> 
>> 
>>> On 05/12/2016 02:57 PM, Ian Turton wrote:
>>> I've been trying to stay out of the arguments about governance models 
>>> because I prefer to write code than worry about licences or governance. But 
>>> it may help if I share a some anecdotes (which is almost data) about a 
>>> couple of FOSS projects that came out of academia when I was in charge. One 
>>> of these you may well have heard of GeoTools, which forms the base library 
>>> of GeoServer, UDig, GeoMesa and others, the other you may not know GeoVista 
>>> Studio. 
>>> 
>>> Both these libraries started out as academic projects that solved a 
>>> research problem, both were open sourced as a result of the university 
>>> claiming all the intellectual property of it's staff for ever (so why not 
>>> give it away?) in both cases I (and James Macgil) were benevolent dictators 
>>> when the projects launched, it was a simple governance model that left us 
>>> able to get on with coding and researching and meant that things went the 
>>> way we wanted. GeoTools started to get some users and people started asking 
>>> for bug fixes and new features etc while James & I had actual jobs to do 
>>> and wanted to spend time with our families and go on holiday etc. So we got 
>>> some more people involved such as TOPP and Refractions and we sort of 
>>> lucked into a PSC and GeoTools went from strength to strength and now has a 
>>> PSC that spans the globe (which makes meeting times hard to find but is 
>>> otherwise awesome). In fact for a while GeoTools and GeoServer managed (or 
>>> thrived) with no input from me or James at all. However GeoVISTA studio, 
>>> only went open source grudgingly (the PI's didn't want to give up control 
>>> really) and never really gained more than a few users because we didn't 
>>> allow other people to influence the direction of development (after all the 
>>> university/PI was paying for the development) and thus there were only ever 
>>> two or three developers. As BD I had no real interest in attracting new 
>>> users (previous experience had taught me that's hard work). Once James and 
>>> then I moved on to other jobs development stopped (though apparently 
>>> someone downloaded a copy last week).
>>> 
>>> I'll leave you to draw 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Recovering OSGeo account password

[Sandro Santilli]

On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 10:31:32AM -0700, Zan Strausz wrote:

> Not sure who to contact to help with recovering access to my
> account, there seems to be no password recovery enabled in the login
> page.  Got this list address from account registration page
> (https://www2.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/ldap_create_user.py)

I handled this (from your IRC mention).
Please Zan let me know if everything is fine now.

> Sorry to bother,  :>(

No problem, we're not github or one of those others big corporations
with no time for users :P

--strk;
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[OSGeo-Discuss] Recovering OSGeo account password

[Zan Strausz]

I just recently created an OSGeo account specifically to access 
hub.qgis.org to file a bug report.  I filed report, now I realize I can 
no longer log on at hub.qgis.org; must have incorrect password. Account 
is userid - zanstrausz, used this email (stra...@bentonrea.com).


Not sure who to contact to help with recovering access to my account, 
there seems to be no password recovery enabled in the login page.  Got 
this list address from account registration page 
(https://www2.osgeo.org/cgi-bin/ldap_create_user.py)


Sorry to bother,  :>(

David Strausz
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Tales from a Benevolent Dictator

[Rob Emanuele]

Hi Peter,

This is the second time I've heard you defend your position by simply
saying the greatness of the project justifies whatever model you'd like for
project governance, and mention some independent study that claims your
software is "way faster" and "wins all benchmarks". These are bold, general
and unqualified claims that I would greatly like to understand in a more
detailed way. Please site your sources.

Best,
Rob
On May 14, 2016 5:43 AM, "Peter Baumann" 
wrote:

> OpenHub knows 66 code contributors, and they do not even know (and list)
> all over time. Hence, cannot see anyone felt discouraged. Typical rasdaman
> contributors are interested in design by innovation and not design by
> committee, and that community spirit has made rasdaman a leading tool that
> wins all benchmarks over GeoServer, SPARK, etc.
> -Peter
>
> PS: suggesting a fork just because OSGeo follows a narrow principle that
> does not accommodate rasdaman makes me frown about the ideals behind :)
>
>
> On 05/12/2016 02:57 PM, Ian Turton wrote:
>
> I've been trying to stay out of the arguments about governance models
> because I prefer to write code than worry about licences or governance. But
> it may help if I share a some anecdotes (which is almost data) about a
> couple of FOSS projects that came out of academia when I was in charge. One
> of these you may well have heard of GeoTools, which forms the base library
> of GeoServer, UDig, GeoMesa and others, the other you may not know GeoVista
> Studio.
>
> Both these libraries started out as academic projects that solved a
> research problem, both were open sourced as a result of the university
> claiming all the intellectual property of it's staff for ever (so why not
> give it away?) in both cases I (and James Macgil) were benevolent dictators
> when the projects launched, it was a simple governance model that left us
> able to get on with coding and researching and meant that things went the
> way we wanted. GeoTools started to get some users and people started asking
> for bug fixes and new features etc while James & I had actual jobs to do
> and wanted to spend time with our families and go on holiday etc. So we got
> some more people involved such as TOPP and Refractions and we sort of
> lucked into a PSC and GeoTools went from strength to strength and now has a
> PSC that spans the globe (which makes meeting times hard to find but is
> otherwise awesome). In fact for a while GeoTools and GeoServer managed (or
> thrived) with no input from me or James at all. However GeoVISTA studio,
> only went open source grudgingly (the PI's didn't want to give up control
> really) and never really gained more than a few users because we didn't
> allow other people to influence the direction of development (after all the
> university/PI was paying for the development) and thus there were only ever
> two or three developers. As BD I had no real interest in attracting new
> users (previous experience had taught me that's hard work). Once James and
> then I moved on to other jobs development stopped (though apparently
> someone downloaded a copy last week)
> .
>
> I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions but my feeling is that to make
> the move from an academic to successful FOSS project you need to move from
> dictatorship to committee run projects. If nothing else it allows you some
> down time from running the project while never needing to give up having a
> say in the running.
>
> Ian
>
>
> PS Some recent emails have tried to suggest that governance doesn't matter
> if you have forkability but I think that is a flawed view - but if it is
> true maybe we could just fork RASDAMAN and be done with the discussion? :-)
> --
> Ian Turton
>
>
> ___
> Discuss mailing 
> listDiscuss@lists.osgeo.orghttp://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
> --
> Dr. Peter Baumann
>  - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
>www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann
>mail: p.baum...@jacobs-university.de
>tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178
>  - Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793)
>www.rasdaman.com, mail: baum...@rasdaman.com
>tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882
> "Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis ventis 
> dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli destinata, nec 
> preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD 1083)
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Tales from a Benevolent Dictator

[Peter Baumann]

OpenHub knows 66 code contributors, and they do not even know (and list) all
over time. Hence, cannot see anyone felt discouraged. Typical rasdaman
contributors are interested in design by innovation and not design by committee,
and that community spirit has made rasdaman a leading tool that wins all
benchmarks over GeoServer, SPARK, etc.
-Peter

PS: suggesting a fork just because OSGeo follows a narrow principle that does
not accommodate rasdaman makes me frown about the ideals behind :)


On 05/12/2016 02:57 PM, Ian Turton wrote:
> I've been trying to stay out of the arguments about governance models because
> I prefer to write code than worry about licences or governance. But it may
> help if I share a some anecdotes (which is almost data) about a couple of FOSS
> projects that came out of academia when I was in charge. One of these you may
> well have heard of GeoTools, which forms the base library of GeoServer, UDig,
> GeoMesa and others, the other you may not know GeoVista Studio. 
>
> Both these libraries started out as academic projects that solved a research
> problem, both were open sourced as a result of the university claiming all the
> intellectual property of it's staff for ever (so why not give it away?) in
> both cases I (and James Macgil) were benevolent dictators when the projects
> launched, it was a simple governance model that left us able to get on with
> coding and researching and meant that things went the way we wanted. GeoTools
> started to get some users and people started asking for bug fixes and new
> features etc while James & I had actual jobs to do and wanted to spend time
> with our families and go on holiday etc. So we got some more people involved
> such as TOPP and Refractions and we sort of lucked into a PSC and GeoTools
> went from strength to strength and now has a PSC that spans the globe (which
> makes meeting times hard to find but is otherwise awesome). In fact for a
> while GeoTools and GeoServer managed (or thrived) with no input from me or
> James at all. However GeoVISTA studio, only went open source grudgingly (the
> PI's didn't want to give up control really) and never really gained more than
> a few users because we didn't allow other people to influence the direction of
> development (after all the university/PI was paying for the development) and
> thus there were only ever two or three developers. As BD I had no real
> interest in attracting new users (previous experience had taught me that's
> hard work). Once James and then I moved on to other jobs development stopped
> (though apparently someone downloaded a copy last week)
> .
>
> I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions but my feeling is that to make the
> move from an academic to successful FOSS project you need to move from
> dictatorship to committee run projects. If nothing else it allows you some
> down time from running the project while never needing to give up having a say
> in the running.
>
> Ian
>
>
> PS Some recent emails have tried to suggest that governance doesn't matter if
> you have forkability but I think that is a flawed view - but if it is true
> maybe we could just fork RASDAMAN and be done with the discussion? :-)
> -- 
> Ian Turton
>
>
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

-- 
Dr. Peter Baumann
 - Professor of Computer Science, Jacobs University Bremen
   www.faculty.jacobs-university.de/pbaumann
   mail: p.baum...@jacobs-university.de
   tel: +49-421-200-3178, fax: +49-421-200-493178
 - Executive Director, rasdaman GmbH Bremen (HRB 26793)
   www.rasdaman.com, mail: baum...@rasdaman.com
   tel: 0800-rasdaman, fax: 0800-rasdafax, mobile: +49-173-5837882
"Si forte in alienas manus oberraverit hec peregrina epistola incertis ventis 
dimissa, sed Deo commendata, precamur ut ei reddatur cui soli destinata, nec 
preripiat quisquam non sibi parata." (mail disclaimer, AD 1083)


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Recent comparison of desktop GIS and image processing capability?

[Markus Neteler]

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Paolo Cavallini  wrote:
> Hi Bruce,
> previous attempts proved difficult, as a proper comparison involves a
> lot of work. The ESRI document seems a good starting point. Unsure we
> would be allowed to reuse it.
> Would you be willing to help filling up the table for some free GIS?

Some time ago this table was developed:

"Matrix3" (here indeed a more recent copy of that table):
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nNEtjWBROepTzGgTjZ8PslWyv7z_QqzgF1uRSm-0at0/edit?usp=sharing=CPGQ26EG

We may want to take that as a starting point.

Additionally the work by Steininger comes to mind. See also
https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/23637/comparison-of-open-source-desktop-gis-packages

Markus

-- 
Markus Neteler
http://www.mundialis.de - free data with free software
http://grass.osgeo.org
http://courses.neteler.org/blog
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[OSGeo-Discuss] Slides and recordings of the webinar on "Humanitarian Mapathons for Children"

[Suchith Anand]

Dear colleagues,

On behalf of Geo4All , i am pleased to share the slides and recordings of the 
webinar on "Humanitarian Mapathons for Children" as part of the "Open 
Geospatial Science & Applications" webinar series.

Presenters: Maria Antonia Brovelli, Marco Minghini, Aldo Torrebruno 
(Politecnico di Milano), and Tyler Radford (Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team 
(HOT)

Talk abstract:

This webinar provides an introduction on humanitarian mapathons for children, 
which represent a remarkable educational experience as they combine geography 
and awareness about our world, technology and humanitarian aspects. Following 
the successful experiences of Politecnico di Milano (Italy), the most important 
educational and technical aspects of humanitarian mapathons with children will 
be outlined. The purpose is to provide the GeoForAll community, and specially 
the teachers involved (at all levels), with some practical instructions on how 
to set up and run their own mapathons. The webinar is organized in 
collaboration with the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT) under the umbrella 
of the United Nations Open Geospatial (UNOGeo) initiative of which GeoForAll 
and the Open Source Geospatial Foundation (OSGeo) are partners.

The recordings and slides of the webinar is avialable at the Geo4All webinars 
page at http://www.geoforall.org/webinars/

The background of this webinar is at 
https://hotosm.org/updates/2016-03-09_200_kids_map_swaziland_for_malaria_elimination

Our thanks to   Prof. Maria Brovelli, Dr. Marco Minghini  and all Politecnico 
di Milano colleagues for thier excellent work and service for the wider 
humanity. They have been leading all our humanitarian mapathons (Nepal, Japan, 
Equador) [1], [2] and it is a great opportunity to hear and learn from thier 
experiences. Also thanks to all the school teachers in Como, Italy who helped 
organise this mapathon for the students.This also help teach the students the 
real essence of education and humanity and “sharing knowledge and expertise” to 
help each other in times of need. There is an excellent article on Humanitarian 
Mapathons by Marco Minghini for this month's newsletter at 
http://www.geoforall.org/newsletters/

Thanks to Dr. Rafael Moreno and colleagues at University of Colorado Denver [3] 
for organising the Geo4All webinar series. We are looking forward to work with 
you all on this education mission and expand Open Geospatial Science 
[4],[5],[6] .

Best wishes,

Suchith

Dr. Suchith Anand
http://www.geoforall.org/

Geo for All - Building and expanding Open Geospatial Science


[1] 
http://opensourcegeospatial.icaci.org/2016/04/humanitarian-mapathons-for-japan-and-ecuador/
[2] 
http://opensourcegeospatial.icaci.org/2015/04/mapping-response-contributions-for-nepal/
[3] http://geospatial.ucdenver.edu/foss4g/
[4] http://opensourcegeospatial.icaci.org/2016/04/open-geospatial-science-2/
[5] http://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijgi/special_issues/science-applications
[6] http://opengeospatialdata.springeropen.com/about/editorial-board







This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. 

Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the
author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nottingham.

This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
permitted by UK legislation.

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss