[OSGeo-Discuss] Next 5 years for OSGeo

[Michael P. Gerlek]

Thinking aloud, a possible contrarian view:

A goal like "to produce a comprehensive suite of tools [that do X or Y]..." doesn't likely fit with OSGeo's broad membership and interests.  We are an umbrella organization representing a number of projects, each with its own unique goals and agendas.  It is unlikely OSGeo would be able to produce a specific tool just because (hypothetically) the Board says we should: open source folks often don't take top-down direction well, unless it meets their own personal needs and agendas.

Which is not to say that an analytical tool suite is a bad idea, just that it seems unlikely to be a worthy goal at that level of the hierarchy.

-mpg


> -----Original Message-----
> From: discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-
> bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of "René A. Enguehard"
> Sent: Monday, September 14, 2009 2:35 PM
> To: OSGeo Discussions
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Next 5 years for OSGeo
> 
> What I'd like to see within the next 5 years would be more analytical
> tools. Most of the projects in OSGeo are very much enablers: they put
> the facilities in place for people to program their own tools. However,
> as I have noticed over the years, people are reluctant to move to open
> source implementations of geospatial software because they are, in
> effect, losing capabilities. Yes, there is still the potential for the
> same capabilities to be put back in, but the fact remains they just
> aren't there. For example, I have never seen any MCDA, PCA, HotSpot
> Analysis, CART or neural network tools in open source packages. If we
> were to produce a comprehensive suite of tools offering the standard
> analytical tools as well as some more advanced ones, then these
> proprietary offerings wouldn't look as appealing. Moreover, if we had a
> consolidated toolset which could be used on a multitude of project we
> would not have to re-invent the wheel for each separate project.
> Currently, proprietary software generally offers advanced analytic
> capability out-of-the-box and open source software does not. I see this
> as a bit of a stumbling block.
> 
> Another thing, and I was chatting about this in the lab today, is that
> for particular needs, open source implementations of geospatial
> software
> generally don't have much to offer. The generic capabilities are there,
> or at least enabled for others to program, but special-needs cases
> there
> is not much. The example used today in the lab was CARIS HIPS or SIPS.
> What, if anything, exists in the open source community that could come
> close to the processing capabilities of this?
> 
> Still another area with a lack of development is 3D and 4D modeling /
> rendering / analysis, something like ESRI ArcGlobe with the 3D Analyst
> package or Myriax Eonfusion. There has been very little work in these
> domains which are of particular interest to me. Perhaps the amount of
> people working in these areas is much smaller than the amount of people
> using something more like general analytic capabilities, but it is an
> area that "needs work" nonetheless.
> 
> The point, and I'd like to make this clear, is not the I'm bemoaning
> the
> lack of features and projects in the open source community. I think
> OSGeo and the open source community have done a tremendous job and
> should feel, rightfully, proud at what they have accomplished. However,
> when asked what I'd like to see on the agenda for OSGeo, this is it.
> I'd
> like to see a hard push towards analytics to make the various projects
> we have to offer more directly useful to the average GIS user. In the
> end, it's really about market penetration. The more useful open source
> software is, the better a "deal" it looks like to outsiders and the
> more
> people we'll attract.
> 
> Please note: I don't presume to speak for anyone but myself, IANAL,
> just
> my two cents, your mileage may vary, et cetera, et cetera, ad nauseam.
> 
> Tyler Mitchell (OSGeo) wrote:
> > Hi everyone, a recent chat I was asked about our vision for OSGeo
> over
> > the next 3 and 5 years.  I'd really like to hear thoughts on the
> matter
> > and pool a few of the ideas together for further discussions amongst
> > committees, projects, chapters and the board.
> >
> > It's also a good way for the board nominees in the upcoming election
> to
> > get a sense of where other members are thinking these days.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Tyler
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss mailing list
> > Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss