[Qgis-developer] [Qgis-user] Synergy of QGIS Enterprise and QGIS 2.0/Master branch

[Vincent Picavet]

Hello,


Le vendredi 5 juillet 2013 11:13:47, Werner Macho a écrit :
> Hi!
> 
> My suggestion to solve that kind of problems would be to just have a
> 
> "something"|..... based on QGIS

+1 for that, clear and efficient.

Vincent

> 
> but I appreciate the appearance of the enterprise QGIS and hope that
> it will QGIS itself some push to be more known by companies ..
> 
> regards
> Werner
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Giuseppe Sucameli
> 
> <brush.tyler at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 9:13 AM, Pirmin Kalberer <pi_ml at sourcepole.com>
> > 
> > wrote:
> >> > Pirmin what happens if / when QGIS project itself wants to release
> >> > QGIS Enterprise version - or another company? Maybe it would be
> >> > better to call
> >> > it 'Sourcepole GIS' or something to make it clear that it is not an
> >> > official QGIS product but an official Sourcepole product?
> >> 
> >> I think a completely different name of a "new" GIS which is "very
> >> similar" to
> >> QGIS could be more confusion than one or many QGIS variants.
> > 
> > I agree with Pirmin, a product with a completely different name sounds
> > like a new GIS software.
> > In addition, not keeping the relation with the QGIS project may damage
> > the project itself in the long run.
> > 
> > Why do not put the company name in the front, something like
> > Sourcepole QGIS Cloud/Enterprise?
> > This makes everything more clear and allows others companies, but mainly
> > the QGIS project itself, to create its own version.
> > 
> > Just my 2 cents.
> > 
> >> > Also (out of curiosity) what is to stop one of your clients cloning
> >> > the private source tree that you provide and then making that
> >> > publicly available - or just pushing it back in to the mainstream
> >> > QGIS tree? i.e. do
> >> > you realise any real long term benefit from keeping the tree private
> >> > in the
> >> > first place?
> >> 
> >> We didn't think a lot about publishing our source code branch, yet. So
> >> this
> >> could happen anytime. The question why clients do not publish sources of
> >> commercial FOSS software is hard to answer. Maybe it's a question of
> >> loality?
> >> 
> >> Regards
> >> Pirmin
> >> 
> >> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_open_source_applications
> >> 
> >> > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 2:50 PM, Nathan Woodrow <madmanwoo at gmail.com>
> >> > 
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Yves Jacolin (Free)
> >> 
> >> <yjacolin at free.fr>wrote:
> >> > >> My understanding is that it is a commercial service, so you don't
> >> > >> have
> >> > >> any
> >> > >> licence.
> >> > > 
> >> > > No.  It's still GPL.
> >> > > 
> >> > > Any support docs, or training sourcepole provide however are not.
> >> > > Only the
> >> > > QGIS software bit part
> >> > > 
> >> > > - Nathan
> >> > > 
> >> > > _______________________________________________
> >> > > Qgis-user mailing list
> >> > > Qgis-user at lists.osgeo.org
> >> > > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
> >> 
> >> --
> >> Pirmin Kalberer
> >> Sourcepole  -  Linux & Open Source Solutions
> >> http://www.sourcepole.com
> >> 
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Qgis-developer mailing list
> >> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
> >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> > 
> > --
> > Giuseppe Sucameli
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Qgis-developer mailing list
> > Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-user mailing list
> Qgis-user at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user