MS RFC 10: Joining the Open Source Geospatial Foundation
Yewondwossen Assefa
assefa at DMSOLUTIONS.CA
Mon Feb 6 15:21:28 EST 2006
+1 for me.
I think also that comments/arguments done by Steve/Danie/Frank should
make it to the mapserver user list explaining the reasoning behind the vote.
Assefa
Pericles S. Nacionales wrote:
> My position (and UMN's) is that we move swiftly (option #1). So, with
> the addition of all the comments Frank, Howard, and Daniel made to the
> RFC. I vote +1 to get this process in motion.
>
> -Perry
>
> Steve Lime wrote:
>
>> I'm to the point where I think we should be looking at option #1. We
>> begin to loose credibility with #2, and it is important that
>> MapServer become
>> a strong player in the foundation and that only happens by being amongst
>> the initial members. The bootstrap board is top notch- I trust those
>> guys.
>>
>> Plus, look at the others already in. Grass, GDAL, MapBender,
>> MapBuilder and OSSIM (this suprised me). I really respect all of
>> those projects. I am suprised
>> they could just simply join. I think we are taking a very proactive
>> and open
>> approach- makes a lot of sense.
>>
>> Plus we always have option 3 at our fingertips at any time- the fork.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> Howard Butler <hobu at IASTATE.EDU> 02/06/06 10:53 AM >>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> 1- Be one of the founding projects of the foundation. This means
>>> making our decision to join solely on the spirit of Saturday's
>>> meeting and the decisions made so far, which includes the
>>> understanding that in big part the foundation will be defined from
>>> the commonalities between the founding projects... kind of
>>> reverse-engineering the foundation from the projects. There is a bit
>>> of risk but this gives MapServer a chance to influence the direction
>>> that the foundation will take, and in the end get a foundation that
>>> will better suit its needs. Actually, it's an opportunity but also a
>>> responsibility since the members of the founding projects are
>>> expected to work together to help define the foundation.
>>> 2- Wait and see, and decide to join only once everything about the
>>> foundation is laid out clearly on paper and we know that it's safe
>>> to join.
>>>
>>> Well, we should not forget option 3:
>>>
>>> 3- Never join and continue on our own.
>>>
>>>
>>> Should the RFC be ammended to clearly state which of #1 or #2 we're
>>> talking about? I think you meant #1 (that's what I'd like
>>> personally), but that's not very clear in the RFC.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, the RFC was more about scenario #1 than scenario #2. The RFC
>> should be amended to reflect this. Sitting on our hands and waiting
>> for #2 to come to fruition means a few things in my mind:
>>
>> - Our project's ability to influence the coalescence of OSGeo is
>> extremely limited. This may or may not be a big deal. For example,
>> if the foundation prescribes some sort of
>> website/documentation/infrastructure component and this is inflexible
>> after I've spent all this time on the mapserver website and can't
>> reuse it in the context of the foundation, I have an issue. There
>> may be more things like that. Or maybe I'm overreacting.
>>
>> - Our project sits in purgatory while we wait. Software and
>> development-wise we can continue to move forward. I don't know that
>> we can do too much project-wise (website, infrastructure, project
>> steering committee development, etc). If we're not participating,
>> our ability to accommodate any of the uniqueness of the organization
>> of our project in the foundation becomes very limited. Some of those
>> things (like project steering committee) we don't even do now. If we
>> were to eventually go into OSGeo, we would want to make sure things
>> are congruent with that organizational structure so we don't end up
>> re-doing a bunch of work. At the risk of having to redo things, we'd
>> most likely do nothing.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Another clarification for the RFC: perhaps it should be mentioned
>>> somewhere that if it joins then MapServer would be expected to move
>>> its project infrastructure (CVS, website, lists, etc.) to the
>>> foundation at some point in time.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Please add this stuff to the RFC. It was kind of alluded to, but not
>> clearly spelled out.
>>
>> .
>>
>>
>>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Assefa Yewondwossen
Software Analyst
Email: assefa at dmsolutions.ca
http://www.dmsolutions.ca/
Phone: (613) 565-5056 (ext 14)
Fax: (613) 565-0925
----------------------------------------------------------------
More information about the mapserver-dev
mailing list