<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" />
</head><body style="">
<div>
I didn't think bad with my request and that ou explain is right.I didn't assess
<span class="ellipsis_text">pernicious effects</span> that my request will do.
</div>
<div>
My request is to be sure to justifiy the work it has done by professional with fund I can have from our partner and try to stimulate opensource instead of seeing local agency and authorities buying new arcgis licenses.
</div>
<div>
<span><span class="hps">I have absolutely</span> <span class="hps">not want</span> <span class="hps">to denigrate</span> <span class="hps">the other contributions</span> <span class="hps">as they have</span> <span class="hps">all</span> <span class="hps">their importance</span> <span class="hps">in advancing</span> <span class="hps">QGIS</span></span>
</div>
<div>
<br />> Le 3 juillet 2014 à 14:45, Andrea Peri <aperi2007@gmail.com> a écrit :
<br />>
<br />>
<br />> I agree with Paolo.
<br />>
<br />> A phrase like
<br />> "totally fund" to a feature mean that none other other subject is
<br />> allowed to fund for any evolution on it.
<br />> Because that feture it totally charge on that PA.
<br />>
<br />> But also should be possibile to allow an history of a feature.
<br />>
<br />> So if a PA has fund for the first creation of a new feature , this is
<br />> clearly reported. But also if another user (with its free work ,
<br />> obviously reported) or other kind of user (also another PA) could fund
<br />> for some other evolution is also it reported.
<br />>
<br />> Is this the main advantace of a GFOSS free developed cycle.
<br />> So lock a feature on a single PA is like to put a copyright on it.
<br />> :)
<br />>
<br />> regards,
<br />>
<br />> A.
<br />>
<br />>
<br />> 2014-07-03 14:37 GMT+02:00 Paolo Cavallini <cavallini@faunalia.it>:
<br />> > Il 03/07/2014 14:29, n.rochard@aduga.org ha scritto:
<br />> >> Sear Paolo
<br />> >>
<br />> >> I think, social network is a good way, politician are using it a lot.
<br />> >> The oher way should put the name and logo of the agency/business wich fund *entirely*
<br />> >> a new feature on the graphic changelog
<br />> >> (http://changelog.linfiniti.com/qgis/version/2.4.0/)
<br />> >
<br />> > I understand your point. It may be difficult, or impossible, to define when a feature
<br />> > is funded entirely by one subject; software does not live in isolation, and we risk
<br />> > to overlook fundamental work in favour of more "flashy" new stuff.
<br />> > The issue here is to give appropriate credit to everyone, and be fair in this context
<br />> > is really tricky. That's why I would not mind leaving the advertising of a feature to
<br />> > its funder.
<br />> > Of course, this may not fit equally well everyone.
<br />> > All the best.
<br />> > --
<br />> > Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
<br />> > Corsi QGIS e PostGIS: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html
<br />> > _______________________________________________
<br />> > Qgis-user mailing list
<br />> > Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org
<br />> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
<br />>
<br />>
<br />>
<br />> --
<br />> -----------------
<br />> Andrea Peri
<br />> . . . . . . . . .
<br />> qwerty àèìòù
<br />> -----------------
</div>
</body></html>