I appreciate your viewpoint and assessment very much, Jonathan. I trust the board heeds your advise and lead towards focused investment in those things that matter to the majority users.
Thank you, On Mon, Jun 8, 2020, 1:12 PM <qgis-developer-requ...@lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > Send QGIS-Developer mailing list submissions to > qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > qgis-developer-requ...@lists.osgeo.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > qgis-developer-ow...@lists.osgeo.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of QGIS-Developer digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. QGIS Server and the Grants programme (Jonathan Moules) > 2. Plugin [383] Buffer by Percentage approval notification. > (nore...@qgis.org) > 3. Re: QGIS Server and the Grants programme (Tim Sutton) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2020 21:42:25 +0100 > From: Jonathan Moules <jonathan-li...@lightpear.com> > To: QGIS Developer Mailing List <qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org> > Subject: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS Server and the Grants programme > Message-ID: <6987c634-eb32-57a5-9d4f-455c2c49f...@lightpear.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > Hi List, > Some of you may have seen my blog post on the OSGeo-Discuss list about > which mapping servers are the most deployed. For those who haven't seen > it, QGIS Server has about 60 public deployments (1% of all of them), and > it serves 11,924 datasets (0.5% of all public geospatial > WMS/WFS/WCS/WMTS datasets). > > Potentially controversial here and I appreciate it's not a competition, > but given the low uptake of QGIS Server compared to other Open Source > offerings (GeoServer: 964 deployments, 963,603 datasets; MapServer: 544 > deployments, 389,709 datasets), is QGIS Server something the grant > program should be funding? There are three Server proposals totalling > €10,000, 22% of the fund. > > Now, before you get the pitchforks out(!), please consider the following: > > * Zero sum game - Any money spent on QGIS Server cannot be spent on QGIS > Desktop. (The grants mostly aren't things that will improve the shared > QGIS Core). (This reasoning also follows through to OSGeo funds). > > * Multiple solutions - Open Source (and OSGeo) already has a very > healthy ecosystem of mapping servers - does it need another one? > > * Limited number of users benefited - I don't have stats for it, but > QGIS Desktop is probably the most popular Open Source Desktop GIS, and > is certainly going to have many orders of magnitude more users than QGIS > Server. > > * Playing to your strengths - QGIS' strength is it's Desktop and it's > generally good practice to play to your strengths. > > > So given the above, and that QGIS is already "winning" as an Open Source > Desktop (great job!), I'd like to suggest it's not a good idea to dilute > the limited resources by spending them on QGIS Server. Instead it seems > that far more people would benefit if that money was spent on Desktop, > especially the bug fixing programme. > > Or alternatively, given the "Unique Selling Point" of QGIS Server is its > integration with QGIS Desktop, those resources could be used to further > improve interoperability with GeoServer/MapServer/deegree/etc. Those are > all successful mature OSGeo projects that excel at serving maps, have an > architecture designed for it, and already have huge install bases. > > TLDR: QGIS excels at being a Desktop, and I'd like to suggest it should > play to its strengths and focus its limited funds there to benefit the > most users. > > I shall now retreat to my bunker. :-) > > Cheers, > Jonathan > > Note: The above only applies to the Grant program and funding; how > developers wish to spend their time, and on which projects is of course > their own prerogative. > > (Disclosure: I have no horse in this race; I don't run or administer any > mapping servers, but I have done GeoServer in the past.) > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2020 21:23:42 -0000 > From: nore...@qgis.org > To: juernja...@gmail.com, qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org > Subject: [QGIS-Developer] Plugin [383] Buffer by Percentage approval > notification. > Message-ID: <20200608212342.2210.78484@2c6504964296> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > > Plugin Buffer by Percentage approval by zimbogisgeek. > The plugin version "[383] Buffer by Percentage 0.3.3" is now approved > Link: http://plugins.qgis.org/plugins/BufferByPercentage/ > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2020 00:09:13 +0100 > From: Tim Sutton <t...@kartoza.com> > To: jonathan-li...@lightpear.com > Cc: QGIS Developer <qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org> > Subject: Re: [QGIS-Developer] QGIS Server and the Grants programme > Message-ID: <d277d1e1-b3b5-439f-99ea-c4b6969e3...@kartoza.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Hi > > > Nice, thoughtful message below, thanks Jonathon. I wonder what it will > take to move the needle above 1%? And whether we should try to use our > funds to make that happen. QGIS is surely the most expressive way to do > cartography of any GIS out there (acknowledging total bias on my part) and > seeing that cartography on the web would surely please many people. Clients > like QWC, QWC2 or anything that requires you to hand edit a config file or > log into a unix shell to publish map services are probably the main > limitation (no offence to those tools). Also the lack of an built in tiling > server (with proper metalling and meta buffering) must surely be the > other. Maybe a more useful approach to your discussion below would be to > promote funding the elements that add resistance to deploying QGIS > server……but then we would be in new feature space and circling back to the > idea of not funding QGIS Server with grants….. > > Regards > > Tim > > > On 8 Jun 2020, at 21:42, Jonathan Moules <jonathan-li...@lightpear.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi List, > > Some of you may have seen my blog post on the OSGeo-Discuss list about > which mapping servers are the most deployed. For those who haven't seen it, > QGIS Server has about 60 public deployments (1% of all of them), and it > serves 11,924 datasets (0.5% of all public geospatial WMS/WFS/WCS/WMTS > datasets). > > > > Potentially controversial here and I appreciate it's not a competition, > but given the low uptake of QGIS Server compared to other Open Source > offerings (GeoServer: 964 deployments, 963,603 datasets; MapServer: 544 > deployments, 389,709 datasets), is QGIS Server something the grant program > should be funding? There are three Server proposals totalling €10,000, 22% > of the fund. > > > > Now, before you get the pitchforks out(!), please consider the following: > > > > * Zero sum game - Any money spent on QGIS Server cannot be spent on QGIS > Desktop. (The grants mostly aren't things that will improve the shared QGIS > Core). (This reasoning also follows through to OSGeo funds). > > > > * Multiple solutions - Open Source (and OSGeo) already has a very > healthy ecosystem of mapping servers - does it need another one? > > > > * Limited number of users benefited - I don't have stats for it, but > QGIS Desktop is probably the most popular Open Source Desktop GIS, and is > certainly going to have many orders of magnitude more users than QGIS > Server. > > > > * Playing to your strengths - QGIS' strength is it's Desktop and it's > generally good practice to play to your strengths. > > > > > > So given the above, and that QGIS is already "winning" as an Open Source > Desktop (great job!), I'd like to suggest it's not a good idea to dilute > the limited resources by spending them on QGIS Server. Instead it seems > that far more people would benefit if that money was spent on Desktop, > especially the bug fixing programme. > > > > Or alternatively, given the "Unique Selling Point" of QGIS Server is its > integration with QGIS Desktop, those resources could be used to further > improve interoperability with GeoServer/MapServer/deegree/etc. Those are > all successful mature OSGeo projects that excel at serving maps, have an > architecture designed for it, and already have huge install bases. > > > > TLDR: QGIS excels at being a Desktop, and I'd like to suggest it should > play to its strengths and focus its limited funds there to benefit the most > users. > > > > I shall now retreat to my bunker. :-) > > > > Cheers, > > Jonathan > > > > Note: The above only applies to the Grant program and funding; how > developers wish to spend their time, and on which projects is of course > their own prerogative. > > > > (Disclosure: I have no horse in this race; I don't run or administer any > mapping servers, but I have done GeoServer in the past.) > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > QGIS-Developer mailing list > > QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org > > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > > — > > > > > > > > > > > Tim Sutton > > Co-founder: Kartoza > Ex Project chair: QGIS.org > > Visit http://kartoza.com <http://kartoza.com/> to find out about open > source: > > Desktop GIS programming services > Geospatial web development > GIS Training > Consulting Services > > Skype: timlinux > IRC: timlinux on #qgis at freenode.net > > I'd love to connect. Here's my calendar link < > https://calendly.com/timlinux/30min> to make finding time easy. > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20200609/55f51b4d/attachment.html > > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: KartozaNewLogoThumbnail.jpg > Type: image/jpeg > Size: 6122 bytes > Desc: not available > URL: < > http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20200609/55f51b4d/attachment.jpg > > > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > QGIS-Developer mailing list > QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > > ------------------------------ > > End of QGIS-Developer Digest, Vol 176, Issue 18 > *********************************************** >
_______________________________________________ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer