I have the utmost respect for the original MTSC and developers of MapServer. I also feel they are looking out for the best interest of the longevity of MapServer and I do feel the idea of the foundation is a good thing, but with that said I also feel some concerns.
As an individual attempting to offer MapServer consulting services for a private business (which is an uphill battle the way it is), I also share some of the same concerns others have expressed on the list over the past day. I feel it is important to let share my concerns with the MTSC and community. The main concern I have is the re-branding and naming of the different software products in the MapServer Foundation. How about calling the foundation something not tied to either name like "web mapping foundation" and let MapServer keep it's name? I think the MTSC is giving up the MapServer name to easy to Autodesk. When I think ahead about giving a presentation or trying to sell an "original" MapServer solution to a potential client, I think it is going to be a challenge and uphill battle trying to explain the difference in software names and why I am using one over the other. I also agree that it makes the "original" MapServer sound like it may not work as an enterprise solution when anybody that has worked with MapServer knows that is not the case. Try explaining that to a client that has not followed MapServer for the past 5 years and knows little our nothing about the software. I also agree with Puneet that something needs to be done to reassure the original MapServer community that this isn't an exploit by Autodesk to simply gain market share. (Why haven't we seen anyone respond from Autodesk, other than their press release that already makes mentions that they are coming out with a commercial version?) I personally would like to see a list of questions compiled with concerns that have been brought up and then answered by the MTSC. Hopefully this would reassure me as a user and business consultant that this is the best software arena for me to pursue offering services. Respectfully, Brian Brian Fischer Houston Engineering, Inc. Maple Grove, MN (763) 493-4522 -----Original Message----- From: UMN MapServer Users List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of P Kishor Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 11:08 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [UMN_MAPSERVER-USERS] MapServer Foundation thoughts and reactions ok. The cat's out of the bag. So, what now? In the interest of bringing the community back to happytown, here are a few suggestions -- 1. Tell Autodesk that they are welcome to the community, however... 2. "MapServer Enterprise" is the re-branding of our MapServer with our PostGIS (go, Refractions, go...). Then we can forget about the Cheetah episode. Funny, Refractions' contribution of their product to the MapServer community was so well done, and so well received. We are forever grateful to Paul Ramsey and friends for their work. And then, this behemoth organization comes in, with no prior history with MapServer, and just blows it. 3. Autodesk is welcome to rename their contribution as Autodesk Coregeo for MapServer Enterprise (ACME, if they so desire). 4. Autodesk is welcome to contribute their other intellectual properties to the MapServer Foundation, which, the foundation will accept after due pontification. (note: MapStudio kinda thing for MapServer enterprise might be nice...). Invite other supersize players to join in as well. 5. MapServer Foundation create the mechanism for transparently and openly electing the governing council. There are many examples out there... the Perl Foundation, the Apache Foundation, etc. Perl Chief Pumpkin Holder mechanism might be a cool thing to emulate for the development side (Steve-o can be the benevolent dictator for life -- he has my vote). The foundation members should represent independent developers, Universities, small as well as supersized business owners/NGOs. 6. Everyone hug each other in Switzerland (for which, thankfully I won't be around -- for the hugging, that is).
