[OSGeo-Discuss] OSGeo is becoming irrelevant. Here's why. Let's fix it.

[Filipe Vieira]

Hi all,

Just wanted to give my opinion on using a external service as source code
repository, I think there is no problem using github because:

- Source Code is protected by the license,
- If github service stops to address the project needs then port it to
other repository. I remember sourceforge starting to be a really bad
service (having a bunch of ads and bad practices)  and people just migrated
to other repositories.
- Having a internal source repository service needs human resources and
hardware, it costs money and time. Having a semi-working service will also
impact project efficiency.
- Migrating a project to other repository is not a problem if the entry
point is always the same: the project website. Most people that look for
releases are going to search them on the project website or on their
operating system software center. For developers they can be warned with a
message on source code project description or readme file.





On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 8:23 AM, María Arias de Reyna <
delawen+osgeo at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 9:17 AM, Julien Michel <julien.michel at cnes.fr>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I am a fairly new charter member, so maybe the two following comments
>> here will be irrelevant.
>>
>> From my perspective, having Orfeo ToolBox as an incubating project
>> definitively helped us to move in the right direction. I am not saying that
>> it would not have occured without OSGeo, but the organization gives the
>> momentum and defines the standards to reach. As such, it is useful and
>> somehow efficient. The fact that the process is long is mostly on the
>> project side in our case.
>>
>> I think that the Github move is hazardous. Sure, it is easy, free for
>> open-source projects, and really really cool. Granted, it helps a lot in
>> getting fluid contributions to open-source projects. But ... in two years,
>> they may start shipping sponsors links at the end of the Readme files, and
>> in a moments notice you have to watch 20 seconds ads before cloning. At
>> this point, you will want to bail out, only to find out that in fact you
>> can not, because you can not delete the project anymore, or the issue
>> tracker database can not be exported ...
>>
>> My point is, OSGeo should care about long-term protection of GIS
>> open-source, and if this goal aligns for now with services that Github
>> provides, it may no longer be the case in the future .Of course we need to
>> be on Github: it is a public place to be, like twitter & co. But completely
>> giving up code hosting and developers exchanges to a private company is the
>> opposite of what I think the organization should do.
>>
>> I know proper hosting services requires time and money, I do not have the
>> solution to that, but for me OSGeo should provide a sustainable
>> alternative, up-to-date and tailored for its purpose.
>>
>>
> Completely agree with you, Julien. Avoid openess and advance towards
> freedom :)
>
> The easiest solution is to have our own git repository+dashboard on our
> own server, like with gitlab: https://about.gitlab.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150928/1c1a562c/attachment-0002.html>