Mike
I think you are right about how this has been presented, but I also
think that it is a reasonably accurate assessment of the situation.
I'm pretty sure that the intent is not as bad as it sounds, but I
also think the way it is written could be trying to sway opinions in
a certain direction - no bonus points for figuring it out though :)
I'm on record for thinking that co-branding is a good thing for
MapServer but I realize I'm in the minority. I've never been able to
eloquently express why I think it is a good thing ... I guess I just
think it is.
In the end, I don't really care that much as I now have two excellent
platforms for delivering solutions to my clients, two platforms that
share quite a bit of underlying technology but that approach the web
mapping problem from two different directions. Being able to say
"MapServer" to my clients regardless of what I was actually going to
do would, I feel, make my life easier ... but not sufficiently to get
in a knot over it :)
Cheers
Paul
On 22-Dec-05, at 10:41 PM, Mike Davis wrote:
a) Work with Autodesk under the MapServer Foundation, creating a
unified
brand name, with MapServer and Autodesk lending their respective
brand
equities to each other and working together to make open source
web mapping
the platform of choice.
b) Work with Autodesk to release its product through a foundation
with a
different name such as "MapTools", with MapServer now competing
directly
with the new brand name that will be created and heavily promoted by
Autodesk, even though they will likely be housed by the same
foundation.
Wow, this really sounds like a "with us" or "with us but against us"
choice you've laid out. I thing the spirit of a foundation should be
to bring together disparate projects with the intent of furthering the
goals of GIS and Mapping based on open standards.
You are absolutely right that the Mapserver name carries a certain
brand equity.
Given time to develop under a common foundation, I think MapGuide/Tux
will build a similar reputation, and hopefully a similar community.
If the idea of an umbrella foundation has legs, hopefully many other
projects sprout up with similar success.
If not, many of the best pieces will probably be incorporated with the
best pieces of Mapserver and it will live on in that way (antialiased
lines anyone?). The key is that the Mapserver community did not grow
overnight. Autodesk cannot expect the existing community to embrace a
totally separate piece of software any more than they can expect to
instantly inherit their own dedicated developer/user community just by
teaming up with an existing project.
Approach the Mapserver project as equals. Give people a chance to
test the waters. They will vote in the only way that really counts...
by using the software, and contributing back to its development.
So in the end I vote for B... with the caveat that the attitude that
projects in a foundation are in competition is absolutely 100% the
wrong one to have.
-Mike
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
|Paul Spencer [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
|Applications & Software Development |
|DM Solutions Group Inc http://www.dmsolutions.ca/|
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
