[Qgis-psc] 2019 grant voting is closed

[Jonathan Moules]

Hi Paolo,

Good thoughts.

 >  Compared to any other solution, it has the crucial advantage of 
allowing very complex and sophisticated styling to be brought to the 
web, thus acting as a WYSIWYG webgis.

This is a great intention and is something the FOSS-Geo solutions are 
sorely lacking. I wonder though if it would be much better attained by 
going the *much* simpler (and thus cheaper) path of improving 
integration with the other current solutions (ideally using open 
standards) rather than the much more complicated process and path of 
creating and maintaining an entire server. This also has the added 
benefit of creating a more dynamic and healthy FOSS-Geo ecosystem where 
folks would then have a wide choice of servers.

A quick back-of-the-envelope investigation shows that of the ~4200 hosts 
of public OGC services in the GeoSeer database, only 4 appear to be QGIS 
server. I'm hoping to do a proper investigation into server software at 
some point in the next few months, but I don't expect the numbers to 
change much.

Cheers,
Jonathan



On 28/06/2019 17:02, Paolo Cavallini wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
> I respectfully disagree with your view: qgis-server is an increasingly
> important part of our ecosystem. Compared to any other solution, it has
> the crucial advantage of allowing very complex and sophisticated styling
> to be brought to the web, thus acting as a WYSIWYG webgis.
> I do not see a conflict between server and desktop here: it is true that
> our resources are limited, but improving one expands the possibilities
> also for the other, so it's more of a synergy than a competition.
> Thanks for your thoughts.
> All the best.
>
> On 28/06/19 11:33, Jonathan Moules wrote:
>>> Personally I find it sad that server proposals never get a majority on
>> such votings. Seems like Desktop is still the priority for most voters.
>> But hey - improvements in QGIS core should also benefit server.
>>
>> Myself I think this is a good thing. FOSS already has plenty of
>> excellent Geospatial Servers. What it doesn't have is lots of excellent
>> desktop applications. there are others of course and I'm not denigrating
>> them, but to me QGIS seems like the leader in up-take and probably
>> overall functionality. I think focussing on QGIS' strength (Desktop)
>> makes much more sense than splitting the very-limited resources on
>> duplicating the already-well-covered Server field.
>>
>> Just my 2p,
>> Jonathan
>>
>> On 26/06/2019 08:06, Andreas Neumann wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Thanks Anita for doing the work on the grant proposals! Looks good to me.
>>>
>>> Personally I find it sad that server proposals never get a majority on
>>> such votings. Seems like Desktop is still the priority for most
>>> voters. But hey - improvements in QGIS core should also benefit server.
>>>
>>> And at least we now have a proposal and price tag for the open server
>>> proposals and can find someone else to fund these improvements.
>>>
>>> All of the proposals sounded useful to me and I hope we can find
>>> others to finance some of the proposals that didn't make it. Or they
>>> can submit again next year if that topic is still relevant then.
>>>
>>> Greetings,
>>>
>>> Andreas
>>>
>>> On 2019-06-25 23:02, Tim Sutton wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Anita
>>>>   
>>>> All looks good to me.- thanks for doing this!
>>>>   
>>>> Regards
>>>>   
>>>> Tim
>>>>
>>>>> On 25 Jun 2019, at 19:11, Anita Graser <anitagraser at gmx.at
>>>>> <mailto:anitagraser at gmx.at>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>   
>>>>> The grant voting is finished. We received 31 votes from 16 community
>>>>> representatives and 15 user group representatives.
>>>>>   
>>>>> I've run the numbers to determine the successful proposals but I
>>>>> think we should have at least two more PSC members cross checking
>>>>> the results before publishing them:
>>>>>   
>>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1f6eAOW8XyxIfuQA1JF5qR1TinDQugofOrNoPJpY-ZUo/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>   
>>>>> Please have a look and let me know if you confirm. My plan would be
>>>>> to announce the successful proposals on Sunday 30th June.
>>>>>   
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Anita
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Qgis-psc mailing list
>>>>> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org>
>>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>>>> —
>>>>   
>>>>   
>>>>   
>>>> *Tim Sutton*
>>>>   
>>>> *Co-founder:* Kartoza
>>>> *Ex Project chair:* QGIS.org <http://QGIS.org>
>>>>   
>>>> Visit http://kartoza.com <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 <http://freenode.net>
>>>>   
>>>> I'd love to connect. Here's my calendar link
>>>> <https://calendly.com/timlinux> to make finding time easy.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Qgis-psc mailing list
>>>> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org>
>>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Qgis-psc mailing list
>>> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qgis-psc mailing list
>> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>>