[Journal] Fwd: Re: OSGeo-Journal: proof reading

[Martin Wegmann]

On Monday, 16. April 2007 18:47, Tyler Mitchell (OSGeo) wrote:
> On 16-Apr-07, at 8:59 AM, Paolo Cavallini wrote:
> > I'm sorry to disagree:
> > 1. the case study is nothing especially new
> > 2. it is not described, but rather advertised, so not really useful
> > 3. as far as it can be perceived, the same situation is perfectly
> > replicable with a fully free and open source stack.
> > The main message that comes out is: "it is possible to use free
> > software
> > along with proprietary sw", admittedly a rather weak one.
> > More generally, the feeling an open source fan will get is "Hey, so it
> > *was* true! Autodesk has bought Open Source!", and that's something
> > nobody wants, I believe.
> > Your argument (only a 100% proprietary solution is unacceptable) seems
> > rather weak to me. I think only papers useful to the spread of GFOSS
> > should find home here.
>
> The main message to gain from the article is that an official OSGeo
> piece of software is being used to help manage and map critical
> pieces of information in a useful way.  Specifically how it is
> implemented is less of a concern to me, though more details would
> certainly be interesting and useful to make the article deeper.
>
> Any article that highlights the use of an OSGeo project is clearly
> helpful in promoting the GFOSS cause - MapGuide Open Source is
> GFOSS!  Are you suggesting that proprietary technology should never
> be mentioned because it hurts GFOSS?

I would suggest to add a very brief introductory for each session, to 
highlight its targeted aim e.g.:

Project Spotlight: General Introduction of open source software projects.

Case Studies: Examples of real world implementation of open source software 
maybe beside proprietary software. 

And perhaps a note at the end of certain articles by the Edt., that e.g. MS 
SQL server can be replaced with xy open source software.

that might make everybody happy - i hope so. 

> We all know that a fully free and open source stack is available as
> alternatives, but why not highlight how some implementors are
> specifically using it?

yes, thats right but it would be nice to mention it, otherwise I think some 
readers will be displeased especially the one developing this alternative.

regards, Martin

>
> Tyler
> _______________________________________________
> newsletter mailing list
> newsletter at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/newsletter