[QGIS-Developer] iOS prototyping

Thu Nov 8 23:52:08 PST 2018

On Fri, 9 Nov 2018 at 17:44, Régis Haubourg <regis.haubourg at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> I'm following this from a distant eye, not being sure to understand clearly what is propose and what is at stake.
>
> Could someone do a brief synthesis for a broader audience?
>
> Concerning the iOS, a word a the french context. Apple hardware costs are so expensive that I almost never see any professional GIS application asked on those platforms. It might be different in the US for sure.
> We have more questions about linking QGIS proprietary software in closed source solutions. And at the cultural moment we see, I see the GPL licence more as a protection and a way to trigger discussions and cultural changes than a real break.
> We already succeded to change some customers mind to open source their product. I'm pretty sure that it wouldn't have been possible with a permissive licence.

Hi Régis!

Your concerns are very valid, but could we defer this to a different
discussion? I really want to avoid this becoming an us-vs-apple/debate
about the merit of specific licenses, and instead allow it to focus
solely on the question: "should the qgis org, with all the checks and
balances it has in place, have the power to relicense the QGIS
codebase (or not)"?.

Nyall

>
> Debate welcome :)
> Régis
>
> Le ven. 9 nov. 2018 à 06:09, Tim Sutton <tim at kartoza.com> a écrit :
>>
>> Hi Nyall
>>
>> Thanks so much for articulating what I couldn’t in your email below. This is 100% what I am after too: A sensible, open discussion with an eye to maintaining the long term survival and success of the QGIS project in a changing world. I agree with everything you said down to the donation of any previous work I have made in the code base to the QGIS.org project.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Tim
>>
>> On 09 Nov 2018, at 04:56, Nyall Dawson <nyall.dawson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 2 Nov 2018 at 00:39, Greg Troxel <gdt at lexort.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Andreas Neumann <a.neumann at carto.net> writes:
>>
>> Before we go to far with the discussion here, I would first ask all of
>> the core devs if they really would like to do that.
>>
>> Without an agreement in place, the code is owned by each contributor
>> separately. I know of quite a few core devs who are not keen on ceding
>> their copyright to QGIS.ORG, if the goal is to undermine the GPL
>> license.
>>
>> I am also not sure if QGIS.ORG is ready to prepare such an ownership
>> agreement.
>>
>> Personally, I fail to understand what the benefits are, if we go this
>> route. On the contrary - I think we are risking to loose many core
>> contributors if we do that.
>>
>>
>> I'm a lurker who has not contributed to qgis, but someday might.  Within
>> pkgsrc.org, a multi-os multi-arch portable packaging system, I'm one of
>> the people that most frequently gets asked license questions.  I
>> maintain the geos/postgis entries in pkgsrc.
>>
>> I have contributed to a number of open source projects -- but I tend to
>> find something else to do when I'm asked to sign any kind of CLA or
>> copyright assignment.
>>
>> I think there are multiple things going on:
>>
>>  How do people feel about accomodating Apple's ban on GPL software for
>>  the iOS app store?  People have talked about qgis having an exception,
>>  but nobody has brought up talking to Apple to get them to change their
>>  terms.  I suspect those who really believe in the GPL's purpose don't
>>  want to make an exception, and there will be enough such people that
>>  rewriting all their code is not sensible.
>>
>>  Evolution of the license as the licensing landscape change.  If we are
>>  talking about changing GPL2 or later to GPL3 or later, that seems
>>  straightforward, and I think all it takes is for core to accept some
>>  nontrivial code that is GPL3 or later.  There is the serious question
>>  about not letting people copy/modify/redistribute under GPL2, but
>>  that's a group social question, not something that needs every
>>  contributor to sign off on.
>>
>>  Change to permissive.  Perhaps because of wanting to accomodate Apple,
>>  or for other reasons, some may want a permissive license.  This is a
>>  huge cultural change, and I would expect a significant number of
>>  people would not be ok with this.
>>
>>  Copyright assignment.  This opens up the fear of a change in license
>>  later (to permissive or to accomodate Apple's GPL ban), which leads to
>>  wanting to have terms in the assignment that constrain the future
>>  choice.  And it means asking people to sign copyright assignments
>>  before their code can be merged.  In my view, this alienates potential
>>  contributors.  So if qgis stays on the GPL "N or later" track, I don't
>>  see why this helps, and it will definitely hurt.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for the feedback here -- it's much appreciated.
>>
>> I feel there's been substantial misunderstanding of the original
>> intent of my email. It wasn't designed to address any *specific*
>> licensing issues such as the issue with Apple's app store. (And, on a
>> practical level, this is a VERY REAL issue, limiting some value of
>> QGIS). That's all secondary to the discussion I was hoping to raise
>> and should be deferred to a future discussion if/when needed/possible.
>>
>> (Gosh, I can't think of how to word this well... I'll just plough
>> ahead and hope my intention gets through)
>>
>> Up front, know that I'm a staunch open source supporter, both from a
>> practical and idealistic view. I'm not interested in closed source
>> software and likely never will be.
>>
>> I strongly believe that the QGIS project has a fantastic governance
>> structure, and one which is a role model for other
>> projects/communities. This is all thanks to the hard work and tireless
>> efforts of the PSC and other members of the community. It's something
>> we should be intensely proud of. I know I am! In fact, I've seen time
>> and time again how good project governance and community in open
>> source projects is often worth FAR more than the code itself.
>>
>> I personally feel that the project governance structure is so strong
>> that I'm willing to trust it with complete ownership of YEARS of my
>> development work*. I've complete confidence in the project governance
>> that they have (and will remain to have) the best interests of the
>> QGIS project at heart. And in order for them to continue doing what's
>> necessary to ensure survival (and dominance! ;) ) of the software, I
>> think it's important that the organisation has some avenue in future
>> to be able to relicense the codebase IF there's a compelling reason
>> why they think it's required.
>>
>> Putting it another way: if, for whatever reason, the current license
>> becomes a roadblock in future which threatens the future of the
>> software, what do we do? I'd hate to see something like this occur and
>> result in the project, and all the years of effort which has been put
>> into it, being abandoned because we have no course of action to
>> address this.
>>
>> I 100% realise this is a tricky conversation... but that shouldn't
>> prevent us from discussing it openly and with a spirit of
>> collaboration. I don't think avoiding tricky discussions just because
>> they are tricky is ever a good approach.
>>
>> And hey, my trust in the project governance goes both ways. If they
>> discuss this topic and decide it's not something they want to pursue,
>> then I'm fine with that too. Like I said -- I trust them to run the
>> project and continue to do outstanding efforts on the jobs we've
>> elected them to do.
>>
>> Nyall
>>
>> *  Heck, take this email as a legally binding agreement if you want --
>> I'm granting the QGIS organisation legal entity any rights they want
>> to code I've written for QGIS over the years to do with whatever they
>> want. That's how strongly I trust them.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> QGIS-Developer mailing list
>> QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> QGIS-Developer mailing list
>> QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
>>
>> —
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Tim Sutton
>>
>> Co-founder: Kartoza
>> Ex Project chair: QGIS.org
>>
>> Visit http://kartoza.com to find out about open source:
>>
>> Desktop GIS programming services
>> Geospatial web development
>> GIS Training
>> Consulting Services
>>
>> Skype: timlinux
>> IRC: timlinux on #qgis at freenode.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> QGIS-Developer mailing list
>> QGIS-Developer at lists.osgeo.org
>> List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer