[OSGeo-Discuss] New Project.

[Bob Basques]

Paul,

It's funny you put it the way you did.  From an Email exchange today
about how our project compares ti OpenLayers :

This is how I see them as being different.  Others, feel free to chime
in.

Moose has more of the Desktop GIS functionality and more tightly
integrated with MapServer. For example: measure, data popups, graphic
design skins, move layers, legends, printing, more configuration
options, identify, and select.  I don't think this type of
functionality
is the goal of OpenLayers, they strive more to make it easy to
integrate
multiple data sources.

OpenLayers strives to have easy support for numerous data sources like
Google, Yahoo, GeoRSS, and WMS.  Then they work off of the concept of
placing point markers and soon vector (line and polygon) on top of
those
data sources.  The also support tiled and untiled data sources in the
same interface.  This works very nice if your don't have a lot of
layers
that are changing all the time and you can make use of caching.  I
think
an interface like this would be pretty slow and hard to manage for a
organization like Douglas County, MN that is updating their parcels,
plats, E911 address points and roads every week.

A more discrete description might be that MOOSE is shooting for the
customers that need to publish data in all sort of formats (and legacy
Systems), in a near Realtime fashion.  The intent is to make the process
as transparent to the Data publishers as it is to the Data users.

We're still early in things, and could quite frankly stand some more
evolving and stabilizing.  As to the incubation time length, this client
has been used internally here at the City for almost two years now and
integrated successfully into many of our other Web Services.  In the
last few months we've put it out to Open Source and do have one other
group using the Package, and actually in the process of working up some
things with the OpenLayers DEV group for some WFS prototyping.   
 
The intent is to grow the DEV community at this point.  

No biggy on the issue of OSGEO not wanting to extend it's umbrella any
further.   We'll work it up some more and ask about things further down
the road.
 
Thanks for the reply.
 
bobb
 



 
 

****************  You can't be late until you show up. 
***************
************  You never learn anything by doing it right. 
************
***  War doesn't determine who's right. War determines who's left. 
***


>>> Paul Spencer <pspencer at dmsolutions.ca> 2/28/2007 1:32 PM >>>
Hi Bob,

this was recently discussed in the incubation committee.  It was  
agreed by all that OSGeo is only officially interested in incubating/ 
hosting reasonably mature projects that have an established code base 

and user community.  It was explicitly decided that OSGeo is not the  
breeding ground for new projects.

As there are already several client projects (MapBender, MapBuilder,  
OpenLayers, MapGuide) in OSGeo or undergoing incubation, I suspect  
that there would be little interest in another Client project.  OSGeo 

is trying to spread the love around a bit and looks to fill in gaps  
in the GIS stack, another hit against a new Client project.  Finally, 

I believe one of the benefits of OSGeo is that it can focus resources 

on existing projects rather than fragmenting it.  That doesn't mean  
that someone couldn't start something new, but in an OSGeo context it 

would be better if the resources for the new project were put towards 

improving an existing one.

Is there a particular reason why you are creating a new Mapping  
Client Project rather than putting resources to improving or  
customizing an existing one?

I believe that it may be possible for nascent projects to use some of 

the OSGeo infrastructure (svn and trac).  I'm not sure there is a  
process in place for requesting this yet.

Cheers

Paul

On 28-Feb-07, at 2:06 PM, Bob Basques wrote:

> All,
>
> I'm wondering about finding a new home for a Mapping Client Project.
> What requirements are there for proposing a new project under the  
> OSGEO
> Umbrella?
>
> I can set up a Physical home for it, but was wondering more about  
> having
> OSGEO handling the Project Ownership in some form.  Or is it better
to
> set up the project standalone and just point to it.  This is an
option
> as well.  I'm just trying to gage interest from the OSGEO
perspective
> about these sorts of things.
>
> The City would still participate in development into the future (at 

> this
> point).
>
> Thanks for any info.
>
> bobb
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ****************  You can't be late until you show up.   
> ***************
> ************  You never learn anything by doing it right.   
> ************
> ***  War doesn't determine who's right. War determines who's left.  

> ***
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
|Paul Spencer                          pspencer at dmsolutions.ca    |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
|Chief Technology Officer                                         |
|DM Solutions Group Inc                http://www.dmsolutions.ca/|
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+




_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20070228/97f74528/attachment-0001.html>