Demise of GRASS

[Marjorie Larson]

Let me second what Fred Limp and Helena have both said - GRASS is 
not dead, and many new exciting developments are still occurring!
Well stated, Fred.

I find that I have several comments I want to make:

First: Kurt's reference to "political pressures" refers to the
fact that we at CERL are an Army Corps research lab.  As such, we
operate in the Army research arena, and must respond to the research
needs of the Army community.  This does not preclude us from doing
specific work for specific customers, but changing research priorities
in the Army can affect our direct funding from Army research sources.

Fred made reference to 5.0 in 95.  We ARE planning a GRASS release 
version 5.0 for 1995.  USACERL efforts are being focused on a slick
new DBMS link, floating point, and vector library enhancements, with
a close eye on cartographic output capabilities, which our (Army) 
users want.  (Once again, the foci are closely linked to the funding.)
If the cartographic output needs of our users aren't met by what
others in the community are already developing, then we'll try to
fill in where possible.  As part of the research mission of CERL,
Helena and others working with her are continuing to develop tools
in the areas of surface interpolation and 3D visualization.

Fred made an additional statement that "CERL and NPS are...reducing
their involvement in GRASS."  The central GIS support office for
NPS in Denver had basically all their employees moved to the new
National Biological Survey (NBS).  This has resulted in some probable
reorganizations in how GIS support is provided within NPS.  Those
shifted to NBS are working to stay involved.  The end result may be
that both NPS and NBS have elements of GRASS involvement.

About CERL: as I stated before, we are a research lab.  As such,
we have to be careful to use the best available means to accomplish
the best possible research results, and have therefore made a
commitment to be "GIS neutral" in our choice of GIS tools for
research (as opposed to having a strong product association).  As
stated by Helena, I believe we may still find that "we are putting
a significant amount of resources into GRASS development because we
haven't found any other system which meets the needs of our research."

As an ARMY research lab, we also are working within the confines
of DOD downsizing and federal hiring freezes or ceilings.  Some
things we are therefore working to contract out instead of trying
to accomplish them in-house.  We will still be involved in the
contracting process, and GRASS continues to be used in an increasing
number of decision support systems and other types of applications.
To date I don't believe we've had any overall decreases in the number 
of people working with GRASS - there are ever more of us, and we still 
sent 25 people to the conference.  

The Army backing for GRASS has weakened in some arenas - stayed
strong in others.  Don't know if all of the above adds up to decreased
involvement on the part of CERL....

OK - so Greg Koerper, in his message bounced to the list by
Fred, noted my departure.  Yes - I'm leaving CERL, and tomorrow
is my last day.  I have no delusions that GRASS efforts will die 
because of my departure.  Rather, I have all confidence that your 
conscientous efforts will work together for an ever better GRASS
and GIS future.  

Let me take this opportunity to thank all of you in the GRASS 
community who have enriched my life with relationships, and who have 
cared and contributed to the growth and sustainance of GRASS.  Please 
don't stop!

Marji Larson