[GRASS5] Re: [Fwd: whinging about GRASS again]

[Joel Peter William Pitt]

Russell Nelson wrote:

> > RN> So my hopes of having my suggestions accepted are low.
> > 
> > First, GRASS has no grand tradition of open source in the GPL sense of
> > open source. GRASS used to be in the public domain, and has only
> > (relatively) recently been placed under open source constraints.
>
>"Open source constraints"?  Public domain software is open source
>software.  Open Source comes under many licenses; not just the GPL.
>See http://opensource.org/licenses/ .
>  
>
I wasn't aware public domain software required the source code
to be released...

> > Third, I'm not sure what "accepted" means in the last sentence.
> > 
> > If it means that you're concerned that your code might not find its way
> > into future releases of GRASS,
>
>Yes, that is my concern.  Glynn Clements has already said "your
>proposal wasn't feasible.  Nothing has changed since then."
>  
>
Well, the beauty with open source software is that you can
go on and start your own forked project if you find you can't
convince the developers here that things need to change...

But as the "President of the Open Source Initiative", I'm sure
you know that already. Nothing like throwing credentials
in to make people see things your way.

> > I think the point is that you should select software that does what you
> > need, not decide up front that you're going to find a way, no matter how
> > circuitous, to use software XYZ to meet your needs come Hell, high water
> > or the tax man.
>
>In other words, "if that's all you want to do, GRASS is the wrong
>package."  See what I mean?
>  
>
Yup, you really should have been using QGIS or something for your
initial handgliding problem.

> > RN> I think that, for GRASS to achieve a larger user base (and
> > RN> consequently larger developer base), it needs changes which will piss
> > RN> off all current grass users.
> > 
> > Does GRASS need a larger user base?
>  
>
<snip>

>I have many years of experience in using computers.  When I run across
>a piece of software which appears to solve a problem for me, and which
>I cannot figure out how to use, I conclude that the software is at
>fault.  Many people do not do this.  If they cannot run GRASS, they
>conclude that the problem lies with them, not the software.  It's
>almost as if GRASS's motto is:
>
>      GRASS: Making GIS Harder Than It Needs To Be For Twenty Years.
>
>I rail similarly at BIND.  The domain name system is not so very hard
>to understand.  BIND makes it harder by combining the function of DNS
>caching and DNS authoritative serving.  It uses a funky zone file
>format.  It uses default parameters that don't make any sense.  If
>you're used to BIND, you won't see the problem.  BIND is great.
>  
>
What I got from this section is that you are impatient
and if you can't learn something fast enough you give up.
I still think you miss the point that GRASS is really an engine
for doing GIS activities.

> > RN> GRASS needs to be completely refactored into a completely different
> > RN> kind of GIS system.
> > 
> > Design it, and look for people to help you code it. What's the problem? If
> > your system can compete well with the old GRASS, users will flock to yours
> > in droves. (Swarm to yours in flocks? Drive to yours in trucks?)
>
>I think the solution is just as you suggested: to create a front-end
>which is helpful.  Doesn't require any changes to GRASS.
>  
>
There are several frontends out there already, you should be
speaking to them.

> > In any event, I don't think GRASS is hard to use. I think GRASS is hard to
> > learn, just like every other GIS I've ever seen.
>
>This is the "GIS is hard, so it's okay if GRASS is harder" excuse.
>  
>
I still think GRASS is not hard to learn. ArcGIS is hard, and you
have to navigate through menus and options to find specific
details.

> > RN> Imagine: an open source GIS package that was both capable AND usable!
> > 
> > There used to be tens of thousands of people who used GRASS every day. Has
> > that dwindled to just a handful while I wasn't looking?
>
>This is the "but lots of people are using GRASS every day" excuse.
>
>Anecdotal evidence: I saw a presentation by the NPS on water flow in
>Mammoth Cave.  Me: "Nice maps; did you use GRASS?"  NPS: "No,
>ARCview.  We used to use GRASS, but .... we switched."
>  
>
You've definately got a point here. I've heard the same from
several institutions, but I reckon it is more about a general
fear of Unix like tools and Microsoft domination.

Joel