[gdal-dev] Adding a "Commercial support" section on gdal.org ?

[Blake Thompson]

Even,

I am not yet a commiter on SVN, but I agree with Tamas that allowing any
commiters would be a great. I personally think listing supporting companies
with an opensource project is a great way to build more support and trust
in the project.

Thanks,

Blake


On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Tamas Szekeres <szekerest at gmail.com> wrote:

> Even,
>
> I suspect most companies providing commercial support for GDAL are related
> to one or more committers, so it might be reasonable to let the committers
> to propose a company to be listed (by describing the support they can
> provide) and probably call for a vote on it. (just my 2 cents)
>
> Best regards,
>
> Tamas
>
>
>
> 2014-08-20 22:02 GMT+02:00 Even Rouault <even.rouault at spatialys.com>:
>
> Hi,
>>
>> I'm wondering if there would be a concensus and interest to add a
>> "Commercial
>> support" section on gdal.org. A number of OSGeo projects have such page
>> (see
>> [1]), so that wouldn't be completely awkward to have one for GDAL as well.
>>
>> The OSGeo Service provider database reference 137 companies/individuals
>> that
>> have registered themselves as providing GDAL support ([2]) ! Pretty cool,
>> but
>> I'm wondering how a user not familiar with the project could effectively
>> use
>> that list to identify core contributors from casual advanced users.
>>
>> If we agree for adding a "Commercial support" section, the question is :
>> on
>> which criteria do we accept an organization/individual to be listed in the
>> section ? We would want them to be as most objective and non debatable as
>> possible.
>> A simple criterion could be anyone who has commit rights (in trunk, not
>> just
>> in a sandbox or customer branch). There are currently 56 SVN committers.
>> That
>> could be strengthened with a minimum number of commits/lines changed
>> during a
>> period, but we perhaps don't need that level of complexity.
>> We could possibly also extend that to entities that provide public
>> support to
>> users through gdal-dev or other public forums (gis.stackexchange,
>> others?).
>> Other suggestions ?
>>
>> Should we distinguish several categories of actors ?
>> - QGIS makes a division between "Core contributors" vs "Contributors".
>> GeoServer has "Core contributors", "Experienced providers" and "Additional
>> services" (the last one is populated on service provider request).
>> - On the other side, deegree, Geomoose or Geotools simply list them in a
>> single section.
>> The answer likely depends on the number of organizations that would be
>> listed
>> (I guess below 10 we don't need much structure). The difficulty here
>> would be to
>> establish the categories and criteria.
>>
>> So, could entities interested in being listed reply to this email so we
>> can
>> have a better idea of how many would be listed, and if we need more
>> stricter
>> criteria or several categories ?
>> As far as I'm concerned, Spatialys would be interested.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Even
>>
>> [1] Non exhaustive list of OSGeo projects with a commercial support
>> section :
>> http://geoserver.org/support/
>> http://www.geomoose.org/info/commercial_support.html
>> http://docs.geotools.org/latest/userguide/welcome/support.html
>> http://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/GettingSupport
>> http://qgis.org/en/site/forusers/commercial_support.html
>>
>> [2] OSGeo Service Provider catalog with entities declaring GDAL expertise
>> :
>> http://www.osgeo.org/search_profile?SET=1&MUL_TECH[]=00013
>>
>> --
>> Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
>> http://www.spatialys.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> gdal-dev mailing list
>> gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gdal-dev mailing list
> gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/attachments/20140820/e58efec5/attachment-0001.html>