Even, I am not yet a commiter on SVN, but I agree with Tamas that allowing any commiters would be a great. I personally think listing supporting companies with an opensource project is a great way to build more support and trust in the project.
Thanks, Blake On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Tamas Szekeres <[email protected]> wrote: > Even, > > I suspect most companies providing commercial support for GDAL are related > to one or more committers, so it might be reasonable to let the committers > to propose a company to be listed (by describing the support they can > provide) and probably call for a vote on it. (just my 2 cents) > > Best regards, > > Tamas > > > > 2014-08-20 22:02 GMT+02:00 Even Rouault <[email protected]>: > > Hi, >> >> I'm wondering if there would be a concensus and interest to add a >> "Commercial >> support" section on gdal.org. A number of OSGeo projects have such page >> (see >> [1]), so that wouldn't be completely awkward to have one for GDAL as well. >> >> The OSGeo Service provider database reference 137 companies/individuals >> that >> have registered themselves as providing GDAL support ([2]) ! Pretty cool, >> but >> I'm wondering how a user not familiar with the project could effectively >> use >> that list to identify core contributors from casual advanced users. >> >> If we agree for adding a "Commercial support" section, the question is : >> on >> which criteria do we accept an organization/individual to be listed in the >> section ? We would want them to be as most objective and non debatable as >> possible. >> A simple criterion could be anyone who has commit rights (in trunk, not >> just >> in a sandbox or customer branch). There are currently 56 SVN committers. >> That >> could be strengthened with a minimum number of commits/lines changed >> during a >> period, but we perhaps don't need that level of complexity. >> We could possibly also extend that to entities that provide public >> support to >> users through gdal-dev or other public forums (gis.stackexchange, >> others?). >> Other suggestions ? >> >> Should we distinguish several categories of actors ? >> - QGIS makes a division between "Core contributors" vs "Contributors". >> GeoServer has "Core contributors", "Experienced providers" and "Additional >> services" (the last one is populated on service provider request). >> - On the other side, deegree, Geomoose or Geotools simply list them in a >> single section. >> The answer likely depends on the number of organizations that would be >> listed >> (I guess below 10 we don't need much structure). The difficulty here >> would be to >> establish the categories and criteria. >> >> So, could entities interested in being listed reply to this email so we >> can >> have a better idea of how many would be listed, and if we need more >> stricter >> criteria or several categories ? >> As far as I'm concerned, Spatialys would be interested. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Even >> >> [1] Non exhaustive list of OSGeo projects with a commercial support >> section : >> http://geoserver.org/support/ >> http://www.geomoose.org/info/commercial_support.html >> http://docs.geotools.org/latest/userguide/welcome/support.html >> http://wiki.deegree.org/deegreeWiki/GettingSupport >> http://qgis.org/en/site/forusers/commercial_support.html >> >> [2] OSGeo Service Provider catalog with entities declaring GDAL expertise >> : >> http://www.osgeo.org/search_profile?SET=1&MUL_TECH[]=00013 >> >> -- >> Spatialys - Geospatial professional services >> http://www.spatialys.com >> _______________________________________________ >> gdal-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev >> > > > _______________________________________________ > gdal-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev >
_______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
