Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Whitebox GAT
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 10:45 -0400, John Lindsay wrote: Hello, I wanted to let you know about a new open-source GIS project that I have initiated called Whitebox Geospatial Analysis Tools. Whitebox GAT is a user-friendly and expendable GIS with significant capabilities for spatial analysis. In developing Whitebox GAT I have taken a transparent approach to the open-source paradigm. That is, if the user would like to know how a particular tool's algorithm works, they need not download the source code and wade through the immense code base to find the few lines of relevant code. Instead, each tool has a 'View Code' button that will bring up the specific code related to the tool. Furthermore, they are able to convert the code into other programming languages. The idea is to remove some of the barriers that exist between the developer community and the user community. John, this project is highly interesting, also in view of recent tendencies to transport code across the web to do things on data instead of the other way round (good for some funny discussions in the OGC WPS working group too...). My analogy is that commercial software If I may interrupt rudely and point out that you probably mean proprietary software. We try to use correct terminology to avoid making people believe that Free and Open Source Software cannot be used commercially. Just a side note... is like a locked library where only a few select individuals have the right to access the information contained within; most open source software packages, at least from the viewpoint of the user, is like a public library but there is no cataloging system and the books are all written in Greek; Whitebox is much more like the Internet. You can download Whitebox GAT from: http://www.uoguelph.ca/~hydrogeo/Whitebox/index.html I'd certainly appreciate any feedback that you may have. As already said above, this is a highly interesting approach, thanks for getting it started. Best regards, Arnulf John Lindsay, Ph.D., Assistant Professor Dept. of Geography, Univ. of Guelph Guelph, Ont. N1G 2W1 CANADA Phone: (519) 824-4120 x56074 Fax: (519) 837-2940 Email: jlind...@uoguelph.ca Department Web: www.uoguelph.ca/geography/ Personal Web: http://www.uoguelph.ca/geography/faculty/lindsay.html ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- http://arnulf.us Exploring Space, Time and Mind ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Whitebox GAT
Hi Really exciting concept, I very much like the idea of letting the user see the algorithm; I just differ from other people's views on the use of .net. This is effectively a closed technology and one controlled by a company that has no interested in the sustainability of the solutions created within it. The use of .net also limits the platforms on which the solution can be deployed; strategically that is poor i.e. the limiting of choices in one area because of the choices in another. I would be interested, I imagine off-list, in your reasons for choosing that closed development approach for something you wanted to make very open in other ways. Regards Chris - John Lindsay jlind...@uoguelph.ca wrote: Hello, I wanted to let you know about a new open-source GIS project that I have initiated called Whitebox Geospatial Analysis Tools. Whitebox GAT is a user-friendly and expendable GIS with significant capabilities for spatial analysis. In developing Whitebox GAT I have taken a transparent approach to the open-source paradigm. That is, if the user would like to know how a particular tool's algorithm works, they need not download the source code and wade through the immense code base to find the few lines of relevant code. Instead, each tool has a 'View Code' button that will bring up the specific code related to the tool. Furthermore, they are able to convert the code into other programming languages. The idea is to remove some of the barriers that exist between the developer community and the user community. My analogy is that commercial software is like a locked library where only a few select individuals have the right to access the information contained within; most open source software packages, at least from the viewpoint of the user, is like a public library but there is no cataloging system and the books are all written in Greek; Whitebox is much more like the Internet. You can download Whitebox GAT from: http://www.uoguelph.ca/~hydrogeo/Whitebox/index.html I'd certainly appreciate any feedback that you may have. John Lindsay, Ph.D., Assistant Professor Dept. of Geography, Univ. of Guelph Guelph, Ont. N1G 2W1 CANADA Phone: (519) 824-4120 x56074 Fax: (519) 837-2940 Email: jlind...@uoguelph.ca Department Web: www.uoguelph.ca/geography/ Personal Web: http://www.uoguelph.ca/geography/faculty/lindsay.html ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Chris Puttick CIO Oxford Archaeology: Exploring the Human Journey Direct: +44 (0)1865 980 718 Switchboard: +44 (0)1865 263 800 Mobile: +44 (0)7908 997 146 http://thehumanjourney.net -- Files attached to this email may be in ISO 26300 format (OASIS Open Document Format). If you have difficulty opening them, please visit http://iso26300.info for more information. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[OSGeo-Discuss] ILWIS 3.7 is now available!
Dear list, The 52°North ILWIS Community is proud to announce that ILWIS 3.7.0 Openhttp://52north.org/index.php?option=com_contentview=categorylayout=blogid=52Itemid=67 is now available for download! In addition to a number of bug fixes and general improvements, the ILWIS community has added new vector functionality, providing an even more powerful RS and GIS desktop package. New applications include: * PointMapUnion * PointMapIntersect * PointMapSymetricDifference * PointMapDifference * PointMapRelate * SegmentMapVoronoi * SegmentMapTin * SegmentMapUnion * SegmentMapIntersect * SegmentMapSymetricDifference * SegmenMapDifference * SegmentMapRelate * PolygonMapBuffer * PolygonMapConvexHull * PolygonMapUnion * PolygonMapIntersect * PolygonMapSymetricDifference * PolygonMapDifference * PolygonMapRelate General improvements include: * updated SEBS module and HydrologicalFlow module and separate Help Files for SEBS, * improved WMS - user interface and error handling, * improved Postgres database access, * a number of bug fixes. The Help System revamp has been postponed until 3.7.1. Download as one complete zip filehttp://52north.org/index.php?option=com_jdownloadsItemid=73task=view.downloadcid=159 or in multiple fileshttp://52north.org/index.php?option=com_jdownloadsItemid=73task=viewcategorycatid=36 Find more information about the new vector applications here: http://52north.org/index.php?option=com_contentview=articleid=359Itemid=330 ILWIS mailing list: http://www2.52north.org/mailman/listinfo/ilwis Best regards, Ann Hitchcock 52°North Initiative for Geospatial Open Source Software GmbH Martin-Luther-King-Weg 24 48155 Münster, Germany http://52north.org General Managers: Dr. Albert Remke, Dr. Andreas Wytzisk Local Court Muenster HRB 10849 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[OSGeo-Discuss] 52°North Announces Winners of S tudent Innovation Prize for Geoinformatics 2010
Dear List, 52°North is pleased to announce the winners of the 52°North Student Innovation Prize for Geoinformatics 2010! This year's jury of prominent members of the GI community has decided to award two first prizes. The winners are: 1. Alexander McKeown and James McHugh from the Commonwealth Scientific and Research Organization (CSIRO) ICT Centre in Tasmania, Australia with their proposal Developing an SOS Client for Use by the General Public. The jury was impressed by their concept for mainstreaming Sensor Web Enablement technology. The proposed project will be a valuable addition to the currently available spectrum of SOS clients. The client described will allow the general public to consume sensor data provided by SOS instances, thus advancing Sensor Web Enablement (SWE) technology into the world of mainstream IT applications. 2. Daniel Nüst from the Institute for Geoinformatics in Muenster, Germany with his proposal SOS4R - Accessing a Sensor Observation Service from R. He impressed the jury with his innovative approach of extending R, an open source software environment for statistical computing, to integrate data provided by an SOS. The proposed R extension will allow the integration of real-time, as well as, historic sensor data sets into geostatistical analysis applications via a standardized interface. This will enable R users access to the broad range of sensor data sources that support the OGC Sensor Web Enablement (SWE) standards. Not only will this create a completely new user community for SWE services, it will also enable users with no knowledge of the underlying IT architecture to access SOS instances. In addition to receiving a reward of 2.000,- EUR/prize, the winners have the unique opportunity to work together with 52°North students and academic personnel to develop their concepts and realize prototypical implementations thereof. This collaboration is coupled with a stay at the 52°North Initiative in Muenster. This innovation prize was designed to encourage students to contribute to the development and practical realization of innovative concepts in the field of geoinformatics. It is being awarded by 52°North GmbH, con terra GmbH, ESRI Deutschland GmbH, the International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation (ITC in Enschede) and the Institute for Geoinformatics at the University of Muenster. These institutions work together under the banner of the 52°North Open Source Initiative, with the common aim of promoting research and education in the field of geoinformatics. A central foundation of 52°North's activities is the continuous exchange of research topics and innovative developments between academia and business. Located in Muenster, the 52°North Initiative possesses a level of potential which is unique throughout Europe when it comes to the development of innovative solutions in the field of geoinformation as a whole, as well as in its constituent applications. We congratulate the winners! Best regards, Ann Hitchcock - Dipl.-Geogr. Ann Hitchcock 52°North Initiative for Geospatial Open Source Software GmbH hitchc...@52north.org http://52north.org General Managers: Dr. Albert Remke, Dr. Andreas Wytzisk Local Court Muenster HRB 10849 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Whitebox GAT (Chris Puttick)
Hi Chris, Thank you for your feedback. I think, however, you might be staring a gift horse in the mouth. I write software primarily because I need it and am happy to share it with others. For me, open-source is about sharing ideas, innovating, and improving education. I'm fortunate that I don't need to rely on my programming to make money. Like most computer users, I use Windows and .NET is the framework that we have. It's an excellent framework, despite what some may think of the company that developed it. I understand that many people chose other operating systems (and good for them!) but I'm also aware that the Mono framework allows for the possibility of running Whitebox GAT on Linux/Mac. There are currently people working on porting Whitebox over using Mono. I suspect, however, that there are some out there who would still not be pleased with the use of Mono as a framework. The fact of the matter is that not everybody will be happy all of the time. If this isn't the solution that suits you, I'm sure there are others that are more suited. And that's fine by me. It's just nice that people out there are working hard every day to ensure that you have choices, isn't it? -- John Lindsay, Ph.D., Assistant Professor Dept. of Geography, Univ. of Guelph Guelph, Ont. N1G 2W1 CANADA Phone: (519) 824-4120 x56074 Fax: (519) 837-2940 Email: jlind...@uoguelph.ca Department Web: www.uoguelph.ca/geography/ Personal Web: http://www.uoguelph.ca/geography/people/faculty/lindsay.shtml ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Whitebox GAT (Chris Puttick)
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 9:18 AM, John Lindsay jlind...@uoguelph.ca wrote: Hi Chris, Thank you for your feedback. I think, however, you might be staring a gift horse in the mouth. I write software primarily because I need it and am happy to share it with others. For me, open-source is about sharing ideas, innovating, and improving education. I'm fortunate that I don't need to rely on my programming to make money. Like most computer users, I use Windows and .NET is the framework that we have. It's an excellent framework, despite what some may think of the company that developed it. I understand that many people chose other operating systems (and good for them!) but I'm also aware that the Mono framework allows for the possibility of running Whitebox GAT on Linux/Mac. There are currently people working on porting Whitebox over using Mono. I suspect, however, that there are some out there who would still not be pleased with the use of Mono as a framework. The fact of the matter is that not everybody will be happy all of the time. If this isn't the solution that suits you, I'm sure there are others that are more suited. And that's fine by me. It's just nice that people out there are working hard every day to ensure that you have choices, isn't it? As a very happy Mac user of a gorgeous proprietary interface on top of an open source operating system, I say to you, Very well said. Thanks for creating this and working on this. Even though I won't use it (right away) I am sure many will benefit from Whitebox GAT, and others will borrow good ideas from it. Benefit all around. Keep up the great work. -- John Lindsay, Ph.D., Assistant Professor Dept. of Geography, Univ. of Guelph Guelph, Ont. N1G 2W1 CANADA Phone: (519) 824-4120 x56074 Fax: (519) 837-2940 Email: jlind...@uoguelph.ca Department Web: www.uoguelph.ca/geography/ Personal Web: http://www.uoguelph.ca/geography/people/faculty/lindsay.shtml ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Puneet Kishor http://www.punkish.org Carbon Model http://carbonmodel.org Charter Member, Open Source Geospatial Foundation http://www.osgeo.org Science Commons Fellow, http://sciencecommons.org/about/whoweare/kishor Nelson Institute, UW-Madison http://www.nelson.wisc.edu --- Assertions are politics; backing up assertions with evidence is science === ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Whitebox GAT
Hi, seems to be a great idea. Thanks for this tool. I will try it and get back to you with More details. Sajith VK Freedom is not Free On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Chris Puttick chris.putt...@thehumanjourney.net wrote: Hi Really exciting concept, I very much like the idea of letting the user see the algorithm; I just differ from other people's views on the use of .net. This is effectively a closed technology and one controlled by a company that has no interested in the sustainability of the solutions created within it. The use of .net also limits the platforms on which the solution can be deployed; strategically that is poor i.e. the limiting of choices in one area because of the choices in another. I would be interested, I imagine off-list, in your reasons for choosing that closed development approach for something you wanted to make very open in other ways. Regards Chris - John Lindsay jlind...@uoguelph.ca wrote: Hello, I wanted to let you know about a new open-source GIS project that I have initiated called Whitebox Geospatial Analysis Tools. Whitebox GAT is a user-friendly and expendable GIS with significant capabilities for spatial analysis. In developing Whitebox GAT I have taken a transparent approach to the open-source paradigm. That is, if the user would like to know how a particular tool's algorithm works, they need not download the source code and wade through the immense code base to find the few lines of relevant code. Instead, each tool has a 'View Code' button that will bring up the specific code related to the tool. Furthermore, they are able to convert the code into other programming languages. The idea is to remove some of the barriers that exist between the developer community and the user community. My analogy is that commercial software is like a locked library where only a few select individuals have the right to access the information contained within; most open source software packages, at least from the viewpoint of the user, is like a public library but there is no cataloging system and the books are all written in Greek; Whitebox is much more like the Internet. You can download Whitebox GAT from: http://www.uoguelph.ca/~hydrogeo/Whitebox/index.htmlhttp://www.uoguelph.ca/%7Ehydrogeo/Whitebox/index.html I'd certainly appreciate any feedback that you may have. John Lindsay, Ph.D., Assistant Professor Dept. of Geography, Univ. of Guelph Guelph, Ont. N1G 2W1 CANADA Phone: (519) 824-4120 x56074 Fax: (519) 837-2940 Email: jlind...@uoguelph.ca Department Web: www.uoguelph.ca/geography/ Personal Web: http://www.uoguelph.ca/geography/faculty/lindsay.html ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Chris Puttick CIO Oxford Archaeology: Exploring the Human Journey Direct: +44 (0)1865 980 718 Switchboard: +44 (0)1865 263 800 Mobile: +44 (0)7908 997 146 http://thehumanjourney.net -- Files attached to this email may be in ISO 26300 format (OASIS Open Document Format). If you have difficulty opening them, please visit http://iso26300.info for more information. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[OSGeo-Discuss] Mailing list for .NET work?
I'm thinking there might be a reasonable number of .NET folks lurking around here, and that it might be nice to have a mailing list for .NET-specific open source geo work -- what projects are being done, what issues people have, etc, etc. If interested, send email (to me or to list, at your preference) and we'll see how much support there is. [Pls don't hijack this thread for arguing about how open/closed .NET is.] -mpg ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Whitebox GAT (Chris Puttick)
Please understand I am in no way criticising your software, which sounds of interest although out of reach for me. I am also highly appreciative of the work you and others like you put into developing solutions which you then share with others and I do what I can to contribute too. I am just hoping to persuade you and others that .net has far more bad points than good and to consider using a different software development framework/tools in the future. I find it sensible to stare warily at gift-horses associated with companies whose primary stated purpose is the maximisation of shareholder value. Paid-for software of the license to use variety is a legacy concept fighting hard for survival; those companies whose entire business model is paid-for software are seeking all sorts of methods to ensure they can continue to profit from those business models. The majority of methods being adopted are, like .net, all about lock-in, about making it harder and more costly to move from the incumbent (and encumbered) solution. Hence why I would suggest the use of that particular framework (and there are so many to chose from that are as good or better, even before taking into account the cross-platform bonus feature) is a bad thing; its apparent convenience hides a massive cost base, both upfront and TCO. My job, as sad as it may be, is strategic. I have to think about the future of the organisation for which I work with two over-riding drivers for the decisions I make in my area of responsibility: make it better and make it cheaper. The former requires usability, flexibility, maximisation of choice, and functionality; the latter requires elimination of lock-in to ensure the lowest cost options can be considered. Both tend to mean open solutions are given a high weighting. I can't focus on the immediacy of convenience, as so many of my peers have; evidence has shown the end result is no more money is made/saved by the use of IT than is spent on the IT and all too often less. So that means absolutely no .net. Applications written against mono are more likely to be considered, although I personally believe that developing mono as a poor relation clone of .net is a mistake and a tragic waste of effort; innovation is required to disrupt, not poor copies. Almost all of the software we are deploying in the organisation, GIS or otherwise, is entirely platform neutral. Versions exist that can run on many operating systems and even different processor architectures. Software we are developing internally we endeavour to make as open as possible in the same spirit; for example gvSIG OADE is made available compiled for Mac OSX of which we have exactly 0/300 computers using. I guess it is a matter of perspective. I want to have the widest set of choices professionally and personally want the largest number of choices to be available for others. Those who sell software licences want choices to be limited to their platform, whether that be operating system or ERP tools. I'd like to have the choice to try your app, which has interesting user education opportunities, but it would remove the choice of desktop operating system. Ahh well. Chris -- Chris Puttick CIO Oxford Archaeology: Exploring the Human Journey Direct: +44 (0)1865 980 718 Switchboard: +44 (0)1865 263 800 Mobile: +44 (0)7908 997 146 http://thehumanjourney.net - John Lindsay jlind...@uoguelph.ca wrote: Hi Chris, Thank you for your feedback. I think, however, you might be staring a gift horse in the mouth. I write software primarily because I need it and am happy to share it with others. For me, open-source is about sharing ideas, innovating, and improving education. I'm fortunate that I don't need to rely on my programming to make money. Like most computer users, I use Windows and .NET is the framework that we have. It's an excellent framework, despite what some may think of the company that developed it. I understand that many people chose other operating systems (and good for them!) but I'm also aware that the Mono framework allows for the possibility of running Whitebox GAT on Linux/Mac. There are currently people working on porting Whitebox over using Mono. I suspect, however, that there are some out there who would still not be pleased with the use of Mono as a framework. The fact of the matter is that not everybody will be happy all of the time. If this isn't the solution that suits you, I'm sure there are others that are more suited. And that's fine by me. It's just nice that people out there are working hard every day to ensure that you have choices, isn't it? -- John Lindsay, Ph.D., Assistant Professor Dept. of Geography, Univ. of Guelph Guelph, Ont. N1G 2W1 CANADA Phone: (519) 824-4120 x56074 Fax: (519) 837-2940 Email: jlind...@uoguelph.ca Department Web: www.uoguelph.ca/geography/ Personal Web: http://www.uoguelph.ca/geography/people/faculty/lindsay.shtml
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Mailing list for .NET work?
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Michael P. Gerlek m...@lizardtech.com wrote: I'm thinking there might be a reasonable number of .NET folks lurking around here, and that it might be nice to have a mailing list for .NET-specific open source geo work -- what projects are being done, what issues people have, etc, etc. If interested, send email (to me or to list, at your preference) and we'll see how much support there is. [Pls don't hijack this thread for arguing about how open/closed .NET is.] Actually, I would encourage you to discuss it right here, unless you want to focus on a specific project's development work, in which case an OSGeo-project-dev kinda list might be more suitable. I would love to vicariously learn more about what is going on in other programming worlds, otherwise I would be clueless about them. -- Puneet Kishor http://www.punkish.org Carbon Model http://carbonmodel.org Charter Member, Open Source Geospatial Foundation http://www.osgeo.org Science Commons Fellow, http://sciencecommons.org/about/whoweare/kishor Nelson Institute, UW-Madison http://www.nelson.wisc.edu --- Assertions are politics; backing up assertions with evidence is science === ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Whitebox GAT (Chris Puttick)
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Chris Puttick chris.putt...@thehumanjourney.net wrote: Please understand I am in no way criticising your software, which sounds of interest although out of reach for me. I am also highly appreciative of the work you and others like you put into developing solutions which you then share with others and I do what I can to contribute too. I am just hoping to persuade you and others that .net has far more bad points than good and to consider using a different software development framework/tools in the future. I find it sensible to stare warily at gift-horses associated with companies whose primary stated purpose is the maximisation of shareholder value. Paid-for software of the license to use variety is a legacy concept fighting hard for survival; those companies whose entire business model is paid-for software are seeking all sorts of methods to ensure they can continue to profit from those business models. You make that assertion based on what evidence? Any citations? Slideshow presentations and keynote addresses at conferences don't count. Surely the fact that a bunch of us open source aficionados have a number of projects we work on and talk about does not an evidence make that paid-for software is fighting hard for survival. Let me see... 26 million copies of Mac OS X, 45 million copies of iPhone OS... and that is only single digit percentage of worldwide operating system share, more than 90%+ of which is Windows -- a legacy software fighting hard for survival? I think not. Listen, I personally appreciate the zeal for open sourcing software and data (most of my personal religion is based on the belief that open data are better for everyone), but trash talking closed software makes the whole world blind. My personal belief is that the most powerful programming language in the world is the one you know. The Whitehouse GAT developers happen to be versed in .NET. Let us appreciate what they are doing, and learn from it... as I said earlier, good ideas cross-pollinate, so it can only be good for the entire software ecosystem. The majority of methods being adopted are, like .net, all about lock-in, about making it harder and more costly to move from the incumbent (and encumbered) solution. Hence why I would suggest the use of that particular framework (and there are so many to chose from that are as good or better, even before taking into account the cross-platform bonus feature) is a bad thing; its apparent convenience hides a massive cost base, both upfront and TCO. My job, as sad as it may be, is strategic. I have to think about the future of the organisation for which I work with two over-riding drivers for the decisions I make in my area of responsibility: make it better and make it cheaper. The former requires usability, flexibility, maximisation of choice, and functionality; the latter requires elimination of lock-in to ensure the lowest cost options can be considered. Both tend to mean open solutions are given a high weighting. I can't focus on the immediacy of convenience, as so many of my peers have; evidence has shown the end result is no more money is made/saved by the use of IT than is spent on the IT and all too often less. So that means absolutely no .net. Applications written against mono are more likely to be considered, although I personally believe that developing mono as a poor relation clone of .net is a mistake and a tragic waste of effort; innovation is required to disrupt, not poor copies. Almost all of the software we are deploying in the organisation, GIS or otherwise, is entirely platform neutral. Versions exist that can run on many operating systems and even different processor architectures. Software we are developing internally we endeavour to make as open as possible in the same spirit; for example gvSIG OADE is made available compiled for Mac OSX of which we have exactly 0/300 computers using. I guess it is a matter of perspective. I want to have the widest set of choices professionally and personally want the largest number of choices to be available for others. Those who sell software licences want choices to be limited to their platform, whether that be operating system or ERP tools. I'd like to have the choice to try your app, which has interesting user education opportunities, but it would remove the choice of desktop operating system. Ahh well. Chris -- Chris Puttick CIO Oxford Archaeology: Exploring the Human Journey Direct: +44 (0)1865 980 718 Switchboard: +44 (0)1865 263 800 Mobile: +44 (0)7908 997 146 http://thehumanjourney.net - John Lindsay jlind...@uoguelph.ca wrote: Hi Chris, Thank you for your feedback. I think, however, you might be staring a gift horse in the mouth. I write software primarily because I need it and am happy to share it with others. For me, open-source is about sharing ideas, innovating, and
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Mailing list for .NET work?
On 03/26/2010 09:10 AM, P Kishor wrote: On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Michael P. Gerlek m...@lizardtech.com wrote: I'm thinking there might be a reasonable number of .NET folks lurking around here, and that it might be nice to have a mailing list for .NET-specific open source geo work -- what projects are being done, what issues people have, etc, etc. If interested, send email (to me or to list, at your preference) and we'll see how much support there is. [Pls don't hijack this thread for arguing about how open/closed .NET is.] Actually, I would encourage you to discuss it right here, unless you want to focus on a specific project's development work, in which case an OSGeo-project-dev kinda list might be more suitable. I would love to vicariously learn more about what is going on in other programming worlds, otherwise I would be clueless about them. I would agree that project specific lists are the way to go, I think language/framework specific lists on OSGeo would only fracture the community dialog. I would also hope that we are open enough to entertain discussions about all open source (regardless of which language, and how open). Thanks, Alex ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Whitebox GAT (Chris Puttick)
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 04:03:52PM +, Chris Puttick wrote: Please understand I am in no way criticising your software, which sounds of interest although out of reach for me. I am also highly appreciative of the work you and others like you put into developing solutions which you then share with others and I do what I can to contribute too. I am just hoping to persuade you and others that .net has far more bad points than good and to consider using a different software development framework/tools in the future. I like your software, I just wish you hadn't written it the way you did. You should have written it the way I would have instead. This kind of argument is why I choose the Open Source moniker for my work instead of the Free Software moniker. Many people are willing to work and open source their work -- continuing to criticize someone for the way they chose to do that goes beyond simply expressing an opinion, and directly in to rude. I don't think anyone here is confused or uninformed about the status of .Net or the technologies around it. I guess it is a matter of perspective. I want to have the widest set of choices professionally and personally want the largest number of choices to be available for others. That's a reasonable desire, but not a reasonable desire to force on someone who wants to develop software (unless you're paying them). Discouraging someone taking steps towards releasing open source software because you don't agree with the design/development choices they made isn't appropriate, in my opinion, in an open source software discussion forum. Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt Web Developer ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Whitebox GAT (Chris Puttick)
P Kishor wrote: Listen, I personally appreciate the zeal for open sourcing software and data (most of my personal religion is based on the belief that open data are better for everyone), but trash talking closed software makes the whole world blind. Of course we never trash talk other open source languages either, do we? Where would we be without all the good arguments for Python vs the 'others'... ;-) Sorry, couldn't resist. Just to say, we have done pretty good on this list avoiding platform or language wars, but I am interested to learn what strengths/features/ease-of-use others find in their language of choice. Just to be better educated, not to flame anyone. Tyler ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Whitebox GAT (Chris Puttick)
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Tyler Mitchell (OSGeo) tmitch...@osgeo.org wrote: P Kishor wrote: Listen, I personally appreciate the zeal for open sourcing software and data (most of my personal religion is based on the belief that open data are better for everyone), but trash talking closed software makes the whole world blind. Of course we never trash talk other open source languages either, do we? Where would we be without all the good arguments for Python vs the 'others'... ;-) Sorry, couldn't resist. Just to say, we have done pretty good on this list avoiding platform or language wars, but I am interested to learn what strengths/features/ease-of-use others find in their language of choice. Just to be better educated, not to flame anyone. It will lead to religious wars inevitably... weaknesses and strengths of language are probably better discussed on specific language forums. Probably other forums are appropriate, but OSGeo-discuss is too generic for it, imo. That said, I am finding Python advocates increasingly insufferable; their wonder at look at this wonderful thing I discovered I can do bores me to tears, and their enthusiasm for white space in code that actually means something is just bewildering. ;-) -- just another hacker of a language whose name begins with P ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Whitebox GAT (Chris Puttick)
I think the Transparent Box is a brilliant idea, sorry if I changed the name but what it is. Right? We can look inside and find some issues but that is not the point. It attends what it proposes and the quality/usability is very decent. Congratulation Prof. Lindsay, Adam, Doug, Haze and Micha. Great Job! ---Original Message--- From: Daniel Ames amesd...@isu.edu To: OSGeo Discussions discuss@lists.osgeo.org Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Whitebox GAT (Chris Puttick) Sent: Mar 26 '10 11:46 As I said to John in a PM, I think what he's doing is extremely important and will help bolster the concept of open source for the masses that we've been pushing with our .NET MapWindow project. Three cheers to ANYONE who is willing to bust their chops on some code and put it out to the world! - Dan On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Tyler Mitchell (OSGeo) [LINK: mailto:tmitch...@osgeo.org] tmitch...@osgeo.org wrote: P Kishor wrote: Listen, I personally appreciate the zeal for open sourcing software and data (most of my personal religion is based on the belief that open data are better for everyone), but trash talking closed software makes the whole world blind. Of course we never trash talk other open source languages either, do we? Where would we be without all the good arguments for Python vs the 'others'... ;-) Sorry, couldn't resist. Just to say, we have done pretty good on this list avoiding platform or language wars, but I am interested to learn what strengths/features/ease-of-use others find in their language of choice. Just to be better educated, not to flame anyone. Tyler ___ Discuss mailing list [LINK: mailto:disc...@lists.osgeo.org] Discuss@lists.osgeo.org [LINK: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Daniel P. Ames, Ph.D. PE Associate Professor, Geosciences Idaho State University - Idaho Falls [LINK: mailto:amesd...@isu.edu] amesd...@isu.edu [LINK: http://geology.isu.edu] geology.isu.edu [LINK: http://www.hydromap.com] www.hydromap.com [LINK: http://www.mapwindow.org] www.mapwindow.org * See you at MapWindow GIS 2010! Orlando, Florida, USA 31 March - 2 April 2010 [LINK: http://www.mapwindow.org/conference/2010] http://www.mapwindow.org/conference/2010 Also at: AWRA GIS 2010: [LINK: http://www.awra.org/meetings/Florida2010/] http://www.awra.org/meetings/Florida2010/ IEMSS 2010: [LINK: http://www.iemss.org/iemss2010/] http://www.iemss.org/iemss2010/ * ___ Discuss mailing list [LINK: compose.php?to=disc...@lists.osgeo.org] Discuss@lists.osgeo.org [LINK: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Whitebox GAT (Chris Puttick)
The latent arrogance displayed in this thread is more destructive than any software license. On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 7:31 AM, Christopher Schmidt crschm...@crschmidt.net wrote: On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 01:14:35PM -0400, Arnie Shore wrote: Awww, the relative merits of the platforms/languages involved, IMO, are a far second behind the factor of whether or not the choice makes it available to the largest community of possible users. Free is good; de-facto limitations ain't. The author is certainly to be applauded both for developing the package and offering it here. But I for one can't jump at it. Ya gotta have an OS and a language, so any choice here will prbly hack off some of the truly devout. But you don't gotta have a framework - proprietary or not. Huh? Are there any graphical GIS programs that don't use *some* framework? qgis uses, I believe, qt. uDig, I believe, uses Swing. Heck, even RESTClient uses wx (via Python). In web applications, the situation is even more pronounced -- Django, TurboGears, etc. For UI work, jquery/ext/mootools, etc. Using a framework as part of your development encourages you to write the hard parts... rather than doing the easy parts that people have done before all over again. Now, you may not like the particular one that was chosen here, but that's hardly the same as saying You should enver develop with a framework. -- Chris The choice of .NET rules out for me any interest other than curiosity. And to point out that MONO resolves the .NET issue, simply translates to 'you gotta have that in addition to the basic product', adding to the relative complexity and fragility of an implementation. So, thanks, but no thanks. AS ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Christopher Schmidt Web Developer ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Brian Russo / (808) 271 4166 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Whitebox GAT (Chris Puttick)
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 08:06:59AM -1000, Brian Russo wrote: The latent arrogance displayed in this thread is more destructive than any software license. I'm not trying to be arrogant, I'm sorry if it came off that way. I really just think it's important to realize that Not every programmer programs like I do. There are many different, effective ways, and tools that can be used to write code; writing them off for yourself is fine, but trying to control the decisions someone else makes is ill-advised and potentially harmful. Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt Web Developer ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Whitebox GAT (Chris Puttick)
What I meant to say was... Chris P. has strategic reasons for his choices and was inviting others to share (offline) their strategic reasons for their choices. I wasn't trying to keep this thread running :) Tyler Tyler Mitchell (OSGeo) wrote: P Kishor wrote: Listen, I personally appreciate the zeal for open sourcing software and data (most of my personal religion is based on the belief that open data are better for everyone), but trash talking closed software makes the whole world blind. Of course we never trash talk other open source languages either, do we? Where would we be without all the good arguments for Python vs the 'others'... ;-) Sorry, couldn't resist. Just to say, we have done pretty good on this list avoiding platform or language wars, but I am interested to learn what strengths/features/ease-of-use others find in their language of choice. Just to be better educated, not to flame anyone. Tyler ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Whitebox GAT (Chris Puttick)
It wasn't directed at you Chris, nor specifically at anyone. I just think the general tone of this conversation is pretty unproductive. Sure people have reasons about being strategic everything but maybe it's just how I'm reading it but I just see the old, familiar tones of the Free Software Movement which is do it my way (100% free) or the highway. I don't think that helps anyone.. It's all well and good if you're in a small organisation with 300 pcs or whatever like Chris P and you have that sort of latitude.. but people forget that most organisations aren't driven by cost or ideology - they're driven by business value. Openness is no different than being Green/Sustainable. It has to make good business sense in order to be the right decision. I can't go to my bosses and say we have to do this because it's open source. They won't care and I don't blame them. - bri On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 8:19 AM, Christopher Schmidt crschm...@crschmidt.net wrote: On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 08:06:59AM -1000, Brian Russo wrote: The latent arrogance displayed in this thread is more destructive than any software license. I'm not trying to be arrogant, I'm sorry if it came off that way. I really just think it's important to realize that Not every programmer programs like I do. There are many different, effective ways, and tools that can be used to write code; writing them off for yourself is fine, but trying to control the decisions someone else makes is ill-advised and potentially harmful. Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt Web Developer ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss -- Brian Russo / (808) 271 4166 ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Re: Whitebox GAT (Chris Puttick)
Terribly off-topic now, so feel free to stop reading... - Brian Russo br...@beruna.org wrote: It wasn't directed at you Chris, nor specifically at anyone. I just think the general tone of this conversation is pretty unproductive. Sure people have reasons about being strategic everything but maybe it's just how I'm reading it but I just see the old, familiar tones of the Free Software Movement which is do it my way (100% free) or the highway. I don't think that helps anyone.. You can take it on faith or a Google that I'm pragmatic on the issue. I've explained why I think .net is a poor strategic choice, and that my motivations are strategic. I am all too well aware that many IT decisions are based on convenience and short term outlook, and pretty sure that's a major factor in... It's all well and good if you're in a small organisation with 300 pcs or whatever like Chris P and you have that sort of latitude.. but people forget that most organisations aren't driven by cost or ideology - they're driven by business value. Openness is no different than being Green/Sustainable. It has to make good business sense in order to be the right decision. I can't go to my bosses and say we have to do this because it's open source. They won't care and I don't blame them. ...not realising high or often any business value. Business value is where what you expend money and get more in return than you spent. Incredibly easy to measure in small businesses with few employees and a simple business model, harder the larger the business or the more complex the concept of value becomes e.g. in a charity or government organisation. There is good evidence that collectively western economies have spent more on IT than they have realised in value. The business case is not simple, any more than it is in marketing; but here's my base position in simple terms. I select solutions that maximise our future choices and reduce our costs; a further benefit is derived if I can move any remaining costs from fixed annual overhead to per employee or pure capital; while there may be short term pain as people get used to the changes, any increase in costs for that short period will be more than offset by the long term decrease in costs and increases in flexibility for the organisation. Luckily for me I don't have to justify to others other than in my long term results. I'm aware that this continues to be a rare privilege for the top of the information systems tree and that many organisations continue to not have technical expertise at the highest level, resulting in many decisions in that area being taken with the wrong information and wrong motivations. I'm working on that too. There are other aspects to openness that may derive negative value for some organisations e.g. opening data - great for archaeology, bankruptcy for marketing companies, a matter for the courts for financial companies. But open source solutions for your organisation's IT has no downsides. Unless there are no open source solutions that can be made to do the job. Sorry this thread has deteriorated into a management philosophy discussion. I'm here mostly for the open, I'm not so strong on the geospatial... Cheers Chris -- Files attached to this email may be in ISO 26300 format (OASIS Open Document Format). If you have difficulty opening them, please visit http://iso26300.info for more information. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
