I agree with what Paul has presented here and a great question is does MapServer need a Foundation? If the Mapserver Technical Steering Committee is in place to move MapServer forward... whats the benefit of a foundation? As it is I see progress all around MapServer: the MapServer website, core development, packages from DM Solutions, Refractions, etc, the Mapserver Technical Steering Committee, a book showcasing MapServer, etc; what does a foundation bring. Especially when it is somewhat force-fed? I appreciate and respect the MapServer related work of every member that helped create the foundation... I just don't know if the foundation was created correctly. I will support the MTSC in making tough decisions IF they consult the MapServer community in an OPEN fashion via surveys (Kudos: Tyler/Howard) or another method that will work. I wont get into the naming war, as I addressed that in a more formal fashion via the MapServer surveys (good job providing a location for that input).
If the foundation is for ALL open source spatial products, then don't name it the MapServer Foundation, name it something else, like: Spatial Cheetah Enterprise Foundation (j/k). If a benefit to having such a foundation is foreseen, then it has to be OPEN for me to buy-in; meaning: asking us what we think.
Thanks for reading,
Aaron
On 12/16/05, Paul Ramsey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mapserverers:
You may have noticed that things have been relatively quiet since the
initial Mapserver Foundation open letter, and associated flurry of
response. One of the reasons is that the folks behind the open
letter are a little shell shocked and trying to figure out how to
move forward in a way that is both inclusive and not hopelessly
inefficient.
The big question they are wrestling with is: Who can make decisions
on matters regarding the future of Mapserver?
It is not an easy problem, because among the questions that have to
be answered are:
- Should Mapserver join a 'Foundation' at all?
- If so, under what terms of membership?
- If so, under what name?
I would put to you, the 'community at large' the proposition that
Mapserver already has a good decision making body that has the
interests of Mapserver at heart: the Mapserver Technical Steering
Committee. The MTSC can make the final decisions on all of the above
questions quite capably providing they:
- Take the temperature of the overall community before making big
decisions.
- Hold their discussions in an open forum so all viewpoints get a
hearing.
The MTSC might want to add some advisory members, so they feel that
their voting numbers reflect a broader community, and I think that is
reasonable too, again, as long as they first put the names out for a
public hearing and make sure there are no substantive objections to
their choices.
So, I put the question to you, do you feel comfortable with the MTSC
making some 'big decisions' for Mapserver over the next few months,
providing that they make their decisions within an open framework of
discussion?
For the record, the current members of the MTSC are: Steve Lime
(Chair), Daniel Morissette, Frank Warmerdam, Sean Gilles, Assefa
Yewondwossen, Howard Butler and Perry Nacionales.
Paul
