[GRASSLIST:1165] Re: creating a desktop GIS application using GRASS

[Greg Ford]

Hi all,

> On Tuesday 26 August 2003 12:15, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> > > The problem is that because
> > > of GPL, it is impossible to create proprietary applications for GRASS.

I imagine that many GRASS programmers have contributed their time
for free over the years - with the confidence that the GPL would protect
their work from being exploited by someone making a proprietary
product from their code.  Perhaps GRASS could be converted to LGPL,
but you would need the agreement of every programmer who has
contributed code (or documentation?) to the project.

> I don't think that GRASS could stagnate more than it is stagnating now,
> we are mostly in the state of bugfixing last few years.

I am a newbie with GRASS - but it seems to me that many GRASS
users have invested the effort to learn how to use GRASS from
the command line.  Although to me as a beginner that is very
difficult,  to an expert it is probably easy and convenient?

Perhaps the reason you think GRASS is stagnating is because
the GRASS user community is satisfied with the current functionality?

> ???!!! Application using scripts? That definitely cannot be competitive
> compared with applications for proprietary GIS, tightly integrated into
> the base system.

I think GRASS follows the Unix model of "many small applications that
each do one thing and do it well". Unix was once very competitive -
and after it came out with the GPL (GNU/Linux) is once again competitive.

But you do have a point... (I have not looked at the GRASS source so
someone correct me if I'm wrong) the architecture of GRASS does not
appear to expose a library interface - so any application needs to
call external applications/commands or scripts which is not usually
as efficient or slick.  Consequently the GRASS GUI is a little clunky,
but would be quite difficult to replace.  I think this is probably
a technical and historical issue - not a licence issue, I've seen
similar issues in proprietary software like some well known word
processors.

> > > It is illusion to think, that all required extensions can be created
> > > under GPL.

The strength of opensource projects is that they can potentially
marshall much larger development teams than commercial projects!
GRASS has the whole Internet.

> We must think about a ratio between the work required
> and the number of users, say 'code size'/'number of installations'.
> This ratio is too high for higly specialized GIS extension

But then commercial GIS is very expensive compared to GRASS,
so any organisation (local or regional government agencies?)
needing multiple licences of a specialised GIS tool
may find it cheaper to add the functionality to GRASS than to
purchase from a commercial supplier.

As Linux enters the mainstream - there will be greater
acceptance of all open source - and more organisations
will realise (as IBM has) that they can benefit from investing
development resources into open source projects.
If the option is to invest $1M into licence fees or to spend
$1M adding value to an OpenSource project - you can
be sure the GNU will protect your investment. And you
don't have to pay an upgrade fee 2 years later.

> There are also other aspects, working on OS is attractive while
> most GIS applications is just routine and boring work.

I would have thought maybe the other way around?

> I believe that somebody can realy waste his money and write an application
> under GPL, why not.
>The problem is that we need massive movement in this
> area not one exception. More important than to talk about theoretical
> possibility is to look around at the reality - no such applications.

I have been paid to write GPL based applications on at least two
occasions. I found clients who needed the extra functionality that
I could provide, the GPL was not a problem for them and they
were prepared to pay me for the work.  I got both the money
and the satisfaction of contributing my work to the open source
community.
There is even the possibility that once I have learnt how to use
GRASS, I could find a client willing to pay me to contribute to
GRASS as well!

> > > Until such applications are available (good quality,
> > > localized, with commercial support) most serious GIS users cannot
> > > choose GRASS as their main system.

I am sure you can purchase support for GRASS already?
But as usual there is a strong community who are happy to provide
support for free.

> Not at all, what I want is to give users the freedom to use both free
> and proprietary extensions for GRASS.

But there are already commercial applications for those who prefer to
buy commercial applications!

> GRASS users are not infantile
> idiots, who need to be protected by you GPL. It must be their decision
> what SW they want to use, not your or our.

But (infantile or not) both users and developers are protected by the GPL
Developers are protected by having their contribution protected from
exploitation, and users are protected from becoming locked into using
software over which they have no control.  That's the beauty of the GPL
and I like it.

Greg Ford