Mapserver - Autodesk: hostile takeover, merger of equals or what?
Paul Spencer
pspencer at DMSOLUTIONS.CA
Tue Dec 6 11:15:26 PST 2005
ok, me too :) There is no summary of the discussion to date except
in the mailing list archives and irc logs.
Gary Lang of Autodesk did send an email to the list stating that they
acknowledge the community's comments and are reviewing the naming of
their product.
I'm actually not sure where the renaming of MapServer stands, there
was a poll through the new web site that indicated those who
responded where not in favour of changing the name.
Cheers
Paul
On 6-Dec-05, at 11:48 AM, Skalski Artur - askals wrote:
> OK, I was just sharing my impressions and just impressions...
>
>> I think that the general populace of the community is intelligent
>> enough to evaluate the capabilities of Autodesk's open source project
>> (TUX) and determine whether it meets their needs. MapServer will
>> never (or at least of the forseeable future) implement some of the
>> features that TUX implements. We, as a community of open source web
>> mapping professionals, now have the choice to pick the best solution
>> for a given problem.
>
> I've never doubted in intelligence of the community, and having a
> choice is allways great, but that's not what I meant
> I was just hoping that Autodesk will not take the brand
> 'Mapserver', which is very offen much more known than MapGuide,
> just for him self,
> (I'd rather hear about Autodesk joining the project as it is in
> foundation's open letter than lunching Mapserver Enterprice
> project, because project Mapserver allready exists)
> of course I'm not ammong people who were developing Mapserver, I'm
> just one of many many hapy users, maybe I shouldn't care, but all
> this leaves kind of odd impressions,
> but as I said it's just an impression, an impression after I've
> received today mails from different people sharing with me with
> what I allready knew, but it's how they understood it ...
>
> I was trying to follow the discussion, probably I've missed a lot....
>
> and last thing
>
> probably this is one of the things that i've missed:
> what do you mean that the name issue has been resolved?
> (I assume that 'Cheetah' & 'Enterprice' were accepted as they
> figure on foundation's website)
>
> is there any summary of the disscussion, just to get up to date
> with what's been agreed etc.?
>
> thanks
>
> Artur
>
>
> some comments inline for those that care to read a rebuttal. In
> general, most of the issues that you raise have been discussed
> extensively on both the mapserver-users and mapserver foundation
> discuss lists, and on IRC. You will find folks coming down on both
> sides, but I think the general sentiment expressed in both these
> emails is based on some mis-understandings of the original
> announcement.
>
> On 6-Dec-05, at 9:03 AM, Skalski Artur - askals wrote:
>
>> If I may...
>>
>> I think, things You're saying are TRUE
>> that's how it looks like now
>>
>> I'ts a bit annoying when I get a lot of news and announcements
>> about Autodesk lunching it's OpenSource Project Mapserver
>> Enterprice, whithout any word about already existing REAL MAPSERVER,
>
> this is true, not much was said about MapServer but then there wasn't
> much to say. It was mostly about the foundation and Autodesk's entry
> into the Open Source world.
>
>>
>> and Mapserver 'Cheetah' realy sounds like Mapserver 'Cheeting' or
>> 'Cheeter' for non native speakers, so using this name when offering
>> a webmaping solution to the client will demand a lot of additional
>> explanations,
>
> this has been resolved I think.
>
>>
>> any way I realy hope that Mapsever, people who developed along with
>> the rest of the community will not start living in the shadow of
>> "great Autodesk's open source project ;)"
>>
>
> I think that the general populace of the community is intelligent
> enough to evaluate the capabilities of Autodesk's open source project
> (TUX) and determine whether it meets their needs. MapServer will
> never (or at least of the forseeable future) implement some of the
> features that TUX implements. We, as a community of open source web
> mapping professionals, now have the choice to pick the best solution
> for a given problem.
>
>> regards
>>
>> Artur
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: UMN MapServer Users List [mailto:MAPSERVER-
>> USERS at LISTS.UMN.EDU]On Behalf Of Andre Karp
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 2:36 PM
>> To: MAPSERVER-USERS at LISTS.UMN.EDU
>> Subject: [UMN_MAPSERVER-USERS] Mapserver - Autodesk: hostile
>> takeover, merger of equals or what?
>>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> having thought about what I read in that "open letter" some days
>> ago, I want
>> to contribute my opinion to the discussion.
>>
>> Unfortunatly, I'm not happy about this development, and I will try to
>> explain why:
>>
>> In the beginning, there were two players: the UMN Mapserver people
>> and the
>> Autodesk people. The UMN Mapserver people were using and developing a
>> software which is, from a technical point of view, the fastest and
>> most
>> stable webmapping-technolgy existing so far. The Autodesk people
>> had -
>> sorry, I don't want to offend someone, but this is my opinion based
>> on my
>> experience working with different kinds of GIS Software for many
>> years - a
>> software which was not really competitive, neither against the
>> technical
>> superiority of the UMN Mapserver nor against the commercial
>> predominance of
>> ESRI ArcIMS.
>
> there were more than two players. And it could be argued that UMN
> MapServer was not really one of the players.
>
>>
>> The point why I was upset by the merging of Autodesk Mapguide and UMN
>> Mapserver is, that, from my point of view, the UMN Mapserver people
>> did the
>> work - and they did a really good job - and the Autodesk people are
>> going to
>> harvest. Autodesk is talking about its great contribution - 60
>> years of work
>> ... - but, I'm sorry, 60 years of work does not say anything about
>> what has
>> been done during this time (e.g. look at ArcGIS: there is without
>> doubt a
>> lot of work in this software, but if you have to use it, well, you
>> wish it
>> would be only half as fast and stable as the UMN Mapserver is -
>> sorry ESRI)
>
> they are not merging. Also, while you are correct to say that 60 man
> years of effort may not indicate the usefulness of the product, I
> think you should actually try it and evaluate it for yourself before
> coming up with an uninformed assessment like this.
>
>>
>> Assumed it's true that the UMN Mapserver could need some better
>> marketing, I
>> wonder whether the people from Autodesk are the right people to
>> show how to
>> do, since MapGuide is not a really 'on top' from the marketing
>> point of
>> view - maybe except the coup of grabbing the UMN Mapserver
>> technology ;-).
>
> True. Note that I don't expect Autodesk to promote UMN MapServer.
> That is for us to do. What they will do is help to set up and fund a
> foundation within which both projects can exist and grow.
>
>>
>> The danger I see with merging Mapserver Cheetah / Mapserver
>> Enterprise is,
>> that the reputation of the so-called 'Cheetah'- version gets
>> dependent on
>> the things Autodesk is doing with the so-called 'Enterprise'-
>> version, and
>> whatever they do, it will irradiate to the open-source-version, so
>> the
>> community is getting depend on Autodesk product politics, and we
>> will have
>> to explain the differences to our customers, that means, we are
>> going to be
>> involved in the autodesk product policies. To be honest: not the
>> thing
>> everyone is keen on.
>
> Again, there is no intention of merging the projects technically but
> I see your point about co-branding placing pressure on both
> products. Note that this pressure goes both ways. MapServer has an
> aggressive release schedule and a wealth of features and bug fixes in
> each release. There will be pressure on the TUX team to meet these
> expectations too.
>
>>
>> By the way: "Cheetah" sounds, phonetically, a bit like "cheater",
>> at least
>> for a non-native english speaker like me - ..
>
> no comment.
>
>>
>> The reason behind my negative attitude is: I'm afraid of the UMN
>> Mapserver
>> being spoiled, since I made very good experiences by using
>> open-source-GIS-software in every aspect - technologically,
>> financial, in
>> terms of support - and unfortunatly quiet bad experiences with
>> commercial
>> GIS-software: expensive, slow, unstable.
>
> I would really suggest that you try it out before making the
> assumption that it is like any other software experience you have
> had. You may find that you are surprised. Or not ;)
>
>>
>> Sorry for this quite negative assessment, I really don't want to
>> offend
>> anyone, least of all the people who contributed so much of their
>> time and
>> energy to bring the UMN Mapserver to what it is today: the best
>> available
>> web-mapping solution. I admit I do not have even something like a
>> moral
>> right to influence the development of UMN Mapserver, since I did not
>> contribute to its code. Nevertheless, as a user of the UMN
>> Mapserver it's
>> part of my knowledge and my tool kit which might be affected
>> adversely, so I
>> am affected by that decisions, and that's why I have to express my
>> point of
>> view.
>>
>
> and now you have another tool with which to provide solutions. If
> its feature set has what you need, and you find it is decent, then
> you will use it. If not, then you won't.
>
>> Maybe there is still time to think if there is another way of
>> cooperation
>> between the UMN Mapserver community and Autodesk, a way which
>> respects the
>> spirit of the open source idea in a better way than the announced
>> "cooperation"?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Andre Karp
>
>
> It is interesting to be discussing open source software with the
> following disclaimer in your email ... that's a pretty closed license
> on your comments. Wow ... am I even allowed to quote them or respond
> to them?
>
>> *********************************************************************
>> *
>> ***
>> The information contained in this communication is confidential, is
>> intended only for the use of the recipient named above, and may be
>> legally privileged.
>>
>> If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
>> hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of
>> this
>> communication is strictly prohibited.
>>
>> If you have received this communication in error, please resend this
>> communication to the sender and delete the original message or any
>> copy
>> of it from your computer system.
>>
>> Thank you.
>> *********************************************************************
>> *
>> ***
>>
>
> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
> |Paul Spencer pspencer at dmsolutions.ca |
> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
> |Applications & Software Development |
> |DM Solutions Group Inc http://www.dmsolutions.ca/|
> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
> **********************************************************************
> *****
> The information contained in this communication is confidential, is
> intended only for the use of the recipient named above, and may be
> legally
> privileged.
>
> If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
> hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of
> this
> communication is strictly prohibited.
>
> If you have received this communication in error, please resend this
> communication to the sender and delete the original message or any
> copy
> of it from your computer system.
>
> Thank You.
> **********************************************************************
> ******
>
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
|Paul Spencer pspencer at dmsolutions.ca |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
|Applications & Software Development |
|DM Solutions Group Inc http://www.dmsolutions.ca/|
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
More information about the MapServer-users
mailing list