Marco, I think you have missed the point of my tales, both the projects that I wrote about are open source (by any definition) but only the one with an open organisation is thriving.
OSGeo is designed to support open and sustainable development of geospatial solutions. A benevolent dictatorship is a fragile model of governance and so can not be acceptable to us as a foundation. The (perceived) quality of the software is of no importance in this discussion if the project fails due to a lack of community. Ian PS open hub notes geotools has 241 contributors if we are measuring success in these metrics. On 15 May 2016 14:40, "Marco Afonso" <mafonso...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Anita, > > Aha! So there is a ponderation weight on software quality evaluation AND > project organization evaluation. > > So you can exclude an open source software with high quality if their > organization evaluation is low. > > For me that seems wrong. A software on a public repository is only limited > by it's licence terms, or unlimited at all. :) > > Cheers > Em 15/05/2016 13:14, "Anita Graser" <anitagra...@gmx.at> escreveu: > >> Hi Marco, >> >> On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Marco Afonso <mafonso...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Once the software (as an object) is available on a public repository, it >>> only matters it's license terms to evaluate it's restrictions. From there, >>> it is irrelevant "whos behind it". >>> >> Here I have to strongly disagree. Imho, the job of OSGeo incubation is >> to evaluate a software project (software and organisation) therefore it >> makes no sense to limit discussions to software quality. >> >> Best wishes, >> Anita >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
