<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Hi all,<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 09.06.20 11:23, Régis Haubourg
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CABgOYCdkjoo=YTZP2DCN_YJUe5rVNF9o48mc=0tLm2CuraDxtA@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Hi, <br>
</div>
<div>I can't agree more with Andreas.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
Same here, <br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CABgOYCdkjoo=YTZP2DCN_YJUe5rVNF9o48mc=0tLm2CuraDxtA@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div> <br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Just note that we have major companies betting on QGIS
server for production use and considering switching from
Geoserver to QGIS server to get rid of the double
administration task burden. <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>we also see more and more companies moving away from other
solutions and go to QGIS. The Desktop is often the driver, but
more and more people realize the huge advantage of having the same
rendering on desktop, server and specially mobile. At OPENGIS.ch
we hope to contribute a further big piece to the ecosystem with
QFieldCloud.<br>
</p>
<p>A very very biased observation: in 6 years of running OPENGIS.ch,
we were asked maybe once ot twice to deploy a geoserver instance,
we get monthly requests to do the same for QGIS. Maybe it's
Switzerland, Maybe is us, but most certainly it is not because of
the complexity of installing QGIS...</p>
<p>To me, this integration is a _major_ USP for the QGIS ecosystem.
I'd go as far as saying that it is THE usp.</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CABgOYCdkjoo=YTZP2DCN_YJUe5rVNF9o48mc=0tLm2CuraDxtA@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>They fund progressively what is missing and QGIS.org helps
sometimes for OGC certification testing and documentation but
the majority of the fund are not made by QGIS.org</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>absolutely agreed, in fact if we had more fund I think we could
invest more in the server and make people more aware that QGIS is
not only a desktop tool.</p>
<p>That is also part of the qgis.org website refresh, where we have
an opportunity to really convey better the message of QGIS being
all you need to run your SDI.<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CABgOYCdkjoo=YTZP2DCN_YJUe5rVNF9o48mc=0tLm2CuraDxtA@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So yes, we have open ecosystems, I don't get the point of
trying to cut (small) funds on a solution that is useful,
supported by users and funders.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>As others said before, I don't see this as a Zero sum game, on
the contrary, I think that QGIS here as a real chance to get at
it's real concurrence which is definetly not MapServer or
GeoServer. <br>
</p>
It will still take a bit of time, but with amazing pace that we all
are pushing, we'll get there in less than we think.<br>
<p>Cheers</p>
<p>Marco<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CABgOYCdkjoo=YTZP2DCN_YJUe5rVNF9o48mc=0tLm2CuraDxtA@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best regards</div>
<div>Régis<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Le mar. 9 juin 2020 à 11:12,
Andreas Neumann <<a href="mailto:a.neumann@carto.net"
moz-do-not-send="true">a.neumann@carto.net</a>> a écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif">
<p>Hi Jonathan,</p>
<p>Rest assured - the majority of QGIS funds is already (and
has always been going) into bug fixing. Again - both
Desktop and server users benefit from that bug fixing.</p>
<p>We publish our financial reports here: <a
href="https://www.qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/governance/finance/index.html"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.qgis.org/en/site/getinvolved/governance/finance/index.html</a></p>
<p>If you look into the 2019 report, you can see that around
50% of our funds go into bug fixing and quality assurance
(in some years even more). Only about 10% of our funds
went into the grants in 2019. And from these grants,
server received a small fraction. So, the absolute amounts
of investments that <a href="http://QGIS.ORG"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">QGIS.ORG</a>
invests into QGIS sever is really negligible.</p>
<p>Most investments done in QGIS server go directly from
clients to QGIS development companies - and that has
nothing to do with <a href="http://QGIS.ORG"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">QGIS.ORG</a></p>
<p>If you talk about the number of users of a server
installation - I think this is debateable: if you only
count the admin of a server (regardless of which server),
then the numbers are low - no matter if we talk about
ArcGIS server, Geoserver, UMN, QGIS, etc. But every server
easily has a hundred or sometimes several thousand users
who use these services - don't you think. If I look at our
small province - we have maybe 100 QGIS desktop users, but
certainly several thousand users who use our Web-GIS and
OGC services - don't you agree? And our services integrate
with a lot of other applications that are vital to a
province level government. So in this perspective,
(QGIS)-server installations need to be multiplied with
some factor to compare it with QGIS desktop user numbers.</p>
<p>Andreas</p>
<p id="gmail-m_-646120163478849657reply-intro">On 2020-06-09
10:38, Jonathan Moules wrote:</p>
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding:0px
0.4em;border-left:2px solid rgb(16,16,255);margin:0px">
<div id="gmail-m_-646120163478849657replybody1">
<div>
<p>Hi Andreas, (& All),<br>
A fair point, but I believe this is an important
point and this year I do have data to back up my
point; in fact the grant program is what motivated
me to finally get around to doing this analysis.<br>
<br>
It seems from the replies that while there are a few
differentiators, the key one is indeed cartography
and styling. (There's also an interesting
conversation about vectors going on there too). Some
thoughts:<br>
* The vast majority of WMS/WMTS layers are not
cartographically complicated, let alone beautiful.
They're "here is a layer with small green points for
trees", and "this polygon represents conservation
areas". You can easily play around and see what's
out there here: <a
href="http://www.geoseer.net/api-demo/"
rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.geoseer.net/api-demo/</a><br>
* WFS/WCS can't be styled server side.<br>
* It seems like overkill to create and maintain an
entire server distribution that fundamentally only
solves one (relatively simple compared to what QGIS
Desktop can do) problem.<br>
* Rendering is only one part the QGIS package
(Analysis, digitisation, management, etc.).<br>
<br>
If I'm honest, the "competition" on this point isn't
really between QGIS and MapServer/GeoServer. It's
really between QGIS and ArcGIS. Because ArcGIS does
exactly what QGIS Server seeks to do: offer a single
integrated solution for Desktop-> Server. And
certainly ArcGIS Server does have a huge number of
deployments (53%), however again, there really
aren't many cartographically complicated outputs on
there. And despite the huge number of deployments,
most services and datasets are actually served by
MapServer/GeoServer (about 60% of datasets between
them!). Basically ArcGIS is deployed by local
government and used for bitty-stuff ("here are our
fire stations"), but if you want a real data-service
then you go with GeoServer/MapServer/etc.<br>
<br>
Most importantly though, I think I haven't conveyed
my core point well: this really is a zero sum game!<br>
Even allowing for the above, any funds spent on QGIS
Server are not spent on QGIS Desktop. There are 60
public facing QGIS Server deployments. Even assuming
that there's a ratio of 10:1 for private/public
servers (made up ratio, feels too high), any funding
on QGIS Server benefits only hundreds, or being very
generous, maybe low-thousands number of users.
Funding on QGIS Desktop however benefits as a
*minimum* tens of thousands, potentially millions of
users (no idea how many QGIS installs there are, I
can't find the download-stats I remember seeing in
the past).<br>
Heck, even pretending for a second QGIS Server had
100% of the deployments (a 100 fold increase!),
there would /still/ be orders of magnitude more
people using the not-Server parts of QGIS Desktop by
its very nature.<br>
<br>
There are 3,102 open issues on the QGIS issue
tracker. 95 are labelled regressions, 137 are "high
priority", and 92 are "crash/data corruption". Just
49 are "Server". I'm not seeking to denigrate the
project here; QGIS is a extremely complex tool that
is an amazing accomplishment and by its nature it
will have bugs. I raise these numbers to highlight
that any money spent on Grants to Server (and yes
new Desktop features) is money that isn't spent
fixing these (I'm aware of the bug-fixing fund).
Something I think the grant voters should be
cognizant of.<br>
<br>
Hope that clarifies,<br>
I'll step back now. :-)<br>
Cheers,<br>
Jonathan<br>
<br>
<br>
</p>
<div>On 09/06/2020 08:09, Andreas Neumann wrote:</div>
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding:0px
0.4em;border-left:2px solid
rgb(16,16,255);margin:0px">Hi Jonathan, <br>
You keep repeating yourself. You started the exact
same discussion a <br>
year ago. <br>
You have a valid point, of course, I don't argue
that. But if you think <br>
about small organizations that do not have a lot of
personal (or <br>
financial) resources, it would be a lot of burden to
invest twice the <br>
time in styling: once for QGIS desktop and another
time again for UMN <br>
mapserver and Geoserver. Even if SLD output from
QGIS improved (also <br>
thanks to efforts of Andrea Aime and others), it
still can't transport <br>
everything. If it would, then I would better agree
with your argument. <br>
For such smaller organization, speed (and I know
that UMN and Geoserver <br>
are a bit faster than QGIS server) is not the only
important thing - it <br>
is also their personal and financial resources and
complexity of their <br>
software landscape. <br>
And QGIS server has some other unique selling
points: the proprietary <br>
GetPrint command that doesn't have a match in
Geoserver or UMN, the <br>
ability to create Atlases from server, and who
knows, in the future <br>
perhaps QGIS server can run processing models. <br>
Greetings, <br>
Andreas <br>
On 2020-06-08 22:42, Jonathan Moules wrote: <br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding:0px
0.4em;border-left:2px solid
rgb(16,16,255);margin:0px">Hi List, <br>
Some of you may have seen my blog post on the
OSGeo-Discuss list about which mapping servers are
the most deployed. For those who haven't seen it,
QGIS Server has about 60 public deployments (1% of
all of them), and it serves 11,924 datasets (0.5%
of all public geospatial WMS/WFS/WCS/WMTS
datasets). <br>
<br>
Potentially controversial here and I appreciate
it's not a competition, but given the low uptake
of QGIS Server compared to other Open Source
offerings (GeoServer: 964 deployments, 963,603
datasets; MapServer: 544 deployments, 389,709
datasets), is QGIS Server something the grant
program should be funding? There are three Server
proposals totalling EUR10,000, 22% of the fund. <br>
<br>
Now, before you get the pitchforks out(!), please
consider the following: <br>
<br>
* Zero sum game - Any money spent on QGIS Server
cannot be spent on QGIS Desktop. (The grants
mostly aren't things that will improve the shared
QGIS Core). (This reasoning also follows through
to OSGeo funds). <br>
<br>
* Multiple solutions - Open Source (and OSGeo)
already has a very healthy ecosystem of mapping
servers - does it need another one? <br>
<br>
* Limited number of users benefited - I don't have
stats for it, but QGIS Desktop is probably the
most popular Open Source Desktop GIS, and is
certainly going to have many orders of magnitude
more users than QGIS Server. <br>
<br>
* Playing to your strengths - QGIS' strength is
it's Desktop and it's generally good practice to
play to your strengths. <br>
<br>
So given the above, and that QGIS is already
"winning" as an Open Source Desktop (great job!),
I'd like to suggest it's not a good idea to dilute
the limited resources by spending them on QGIS
Server. Instead it seems that far more people
would benefit if that money was spent on Desktop,
especially the bug fixing programme. <br>
<br>
Or alternatively, given the "Unique Selling Point"
of QGIS Server is its integration with QGIS
Desktop, those resources could be used to further
improve interoperability with
GeoServer/MapServer/deegree/etc. Those are all
successful mature OSGeo projects that excel at
serving maps, have an architecture designed for
it, and already have huge install bases. <br>
<br>
TLDR: QGIS excels at being a Desktop, and I'd like
to suggest it should play to its strengths and
focus its limited funds there to benefit the most
users. <br>
<br>
I shall now retreat to my bunker. :-) <br>
<br>
Cheers, <br>
Jonathan <br>
<br>
Note: The above only applies to the Grant program
and funding; how developers wish to spend their
time, and on which projects is of course their own
prerogative. <br>
<br>
(Disclosure: I have no horse in this race; I don't
run or administer any mapping servers, but I have
done GeoServer in the past.) <br>
<br>
_______________________________________________ <br>
QGIS-Developer mailing list <br>
<a href="mailto:QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<br>
List info: <a
href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer"
rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a>
<br>
Unsubscribe: <a
href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer"
rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
QGIS-Developer mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
List info: <a
href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a><br>
Unsubscribe: <a
href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a></blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
QGIS-Developer mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org">QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org</a>
List info: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a>
Unsubscribe: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div class="moz-signature">
<title></title>
<div class="moz-signature"> <span style="text-align: left;
color: #000000; font-family: 'Verdana', sans-serif;
font-size: 10pt">Marco Bernasocchi</span><br>
<span style="text-align: left; color: #000000; font-family:
'Verdana', sans-serif; font-size: 10pt">OPENGIS.ch CEO</span><br>
<span style="text-align: left; color: #000000; font-family:
'Verdana', sans-serif; font-size: 10pt">QGIS.org Chair</span><br>
<a href="mailto:marco@opengis.ch" target="_blank"> <span
style="text-align: left; color: #000000; font-family:
'Verdana', sans-serif; font-size: 8pt">marco@opengis.ch</span>
</a><br>
<span style="text-align: left; color: #000000; font-family:
'Verdana', sans-serif; font-size: 8pt"><a
href="tel:+41794672470">+41 (0)79 467 24 70</a></span><br>
<div><br>
<a href="https://www.opengis.ch"> <img
moz-do-not-send="false"
src="cid:part14.F16845C9.D694731B@opengis.ch"
alt="OPENGIS.ch Logo" width="200" height="80"></a> </div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>