Rafal.Wawer at sadl.kuleuven.be
Thu Feb 18 07:26:33 PST 2010
None of the reports were submitted to any of the communities. We aimed at completely independent evaluations and the method itself was designed to enable users to perform their own evaluation. We cannot expect users to contact communities each time an evaluaiton is performed. (-;
Although in few cases - e.g. Degree we contacted the developers/communities to get information we needed for documentation. In many cases the documentation of the FOSSG projects was ... Let's say it was very often quite challanging to get information we needed. The lacking information was gained through hands-on experience.
I would love to discuss the details, but I think the list in not a right place for it. Please feel free to send you remarks on my e-mail address: Rafal.Wawer at sadl.kuleuven.be.
Dr. Rafal Wawer
R&D Division SADL (Spatial Application Division)
Celestijnenlaan 200e bus 2224
tel. 0032 16 329731
From: discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Andrea Aime
Sent: 18 February 2010 15:29
To: OSGeo Discussions
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Comparison
Rafal Wawer ha scritto:
> Hi Jovi,
> For a start you can take a look at the evaluation results of CASCADOSS
> project - you will find there also other types of FOSS4G software too.
> The evaluation is a bit out of date - valid for early 2008, but the
> evaluation method itself may provide the clues how to look at and
> compare FOSS4G software projects.
I am wondering if the GeoServer report was submitted to the GeoServer community for double checking? I've noticed a few errors in the report (even for beginning 2008).
For example we had in-build testing since spring 2007, the project was already more than 5 years old in 2008 and so on.
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.
Discuss mailing list
Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
More information about the Discuss