Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[DelazJ]

Hi,

I read this long and passionate thread and, that might have been
proposed earlier, in which case, apologies...but
In case it's not possible to directly state in the website, "Migrate
from XXX proprietary software", what about filling the "Migrate to
Open Source GIS" page with users/customers words? They'd share why
they choose an Open Source project, what they were looking for but
they could also explain why they left their old proprietary software
for a FOSS and if they are happy. I guess in that case it's not OSGeo
that's making a comparison or "tackling" any proprietary software -
just experiences sharing (i'm not a lawyer though).
In backend we could also keep the search tool (suggested by Sandro?)
that would bring newcomers to each story-telling related to a
proprietary tool when they search for that software (still without
exposing those softwares in our site).

Regards,
Harrissou

2017-09-21 23:52 GMT+02:00 Jody Garnett :
> Thanks Even I was going to try and circle back to this today.
>
> We do have the wish to list product names, notably for supported formats and
> interoperability. The http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/projects/geoserver/
> page lists for example:
>
> Server data from a variety of data sources
> Vector: Shapefiles, External WFS, PostGIS, ArcSDE, DB2, Oracle Spatial,
> MySql, SQL Server and more!
> Raster: GeoTiff, JPG and PNG (with world file), image pyramid, GDAL formats,
> Image Mosaic, Oracle GeoRaster, NetCDF
>
>
> We do have a legitimate reason to use product names, but there is reason to
> be careful/respectful when doing so. In the above list we should probably
> add SQLServer® for example, and a footnote to the page.
>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
> On 21 September 2017 at 12:10, Even Rouault 
> wrote:
>>
>> On jeudi 21 septembre 2017 11:20:54 CEST Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
>>
>> > We have that kind of page here
>>
>> > http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/about/migrate-open-source-gis/ ... The
>>
>> > link was removed from the hero area when Steve Feldman changed this in
>>
>> > Boston, so there is no content there now.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Are we not willing to even mention the names of these proprietary
>>
>> > products for fear of 'promoting' them? Or do we want to present the
>>
>> > user coming from outside our community some context about which open
>>
>> > source projects are an analogue or replacement for the proprietary
>>
>> > products they are already familiar with? Thats the real question in my
>>
>> > mind.
>>
>>
>>
>> I cannot honestly think that anyone would seriously believe we are
>> promoting
>>
>> proprietary software if they are mentionned under a "Migrate from" label.
>> But
>>
>> the point here about if we can legally use other product names (and if
>> that
>>
>> is a use of a trademark) in that context is a good one. They are probably
>> rules
>>
>> and good practices to follow in doing so, which can depend on juridictions
>> (probably
>>
>> US law applies here if the site is hosted in the US).
>>
>> Quickly researching about the topic leads to this article:
>>
>>
>> https://moz.com/blog/comparative-advertsing-can-i-talk-about-my-competitor-on-my-website
>>
>> The bottom line is that there are legal ways of comparing to a competitor
>> (is a
>>
>> "Migrate from " mention considered as comparative advertising is
>> another questio),
>>
>> but you can still be sued even if you follow the rules, so it is a matter
>> of
>>
>> appreciating the benefit vs the risk. Funnily they recommand to explictly
>> mention
>>
>> that you're not affiliated with the other product owner! (I guess that's
>> in the
>>
>> same vein as the "Caution: Contents Hot" mention on coffee cups ;-))
>>
>>
>>
>> I had a quick look at https://www.libreoffice.org/ to see if they for
>> example
>>
>> mentionned MS Office or Google docs. The only mention of MS Office I could
>> find
>>
>> is at the bottom of
>>
>> https://www.libreoffice.org/discover/libreoffice/ and it is a link to an
>> external
>>
>> site (they do mention the compatibility with Microsft Word, Excel,
>> *formats*,
>>
>> but that's a bit different than comparing to the products themselves).
>>
>> On http://www.openoffice.org/ similar situation, only mention of MS
>> formats,
>>
>> and for compraisons with MS itself, links to externals reviews from
>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/product/reviews.html
>>
>>
>>
>> Sandro mentionned GIMP's "like Photoshop, only better" motto but on
>>
>> https://www.gimp.org/ no mention of Photoshop I could find
>>
>>
>>
>> If you go on
>> http://www.pitneybowes.com/us/location-intelligence/geographic-information-systems/mapinfo-pro.html,
>>
>> no mention of ESRI
>>
>> Same on
>> http://www.hexagongeospatial.com/products/power-portfolio/erdas-imagine
>>
>>
>>
>> Just trying to decrease the emotional level of the debate with facts ;-)
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
>>
>> http://www.spatialys.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Jody Garnett]

Thanks Even I was going to try and circle back to this today.

We do have the wish to list product names, notably for supported formats
and interoperability. The http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/projects/geoserver/
page lists for example:

*Server data from a variety of data sources*
Vector: Shapefiles, External WFS, PostGIS, ArcSDE, DB2, Oracle Spatial,
MySql, SQL Server and more!
Raster: GeoTiff, JPG and PNG (with world file), image pyramid, GDAL
formats, Image Mosaic, Oracle GeoRaster, NetCDF


We do have a legitimate reason to use product names, but there is reason to
be careful/respectful when doing so. In the above list we should probably
add SQLServer® for example, and a footnote to the page.

--
Jody Garnett

On 21 September 2017 at 12:10, Even Rouault 
wrote:

> On jeudi 21 septembre 2017 11:20:54 CEST Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
>
> > We have that kind of page here
>
> > http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/about/migrate-open-source-gis/ ... The
>
> > link was removed from the hero area when Steve Feldman changed this in
>
> > Boston, so there is no content there now.
>
> >
>
> > Are we not willing to even mention the names of these proprietary
>
> > products for fear of 'promoting' them? Or do we want to present the
>
> > user coming from outside our community some context about which open
>
> > source projects are an analogue or replacement for the proprietary
>
> > products they are already familiar with? Thats the real question in my
>
> > mind.
>
>
>
> I cannot honestly think that anyone would seriously believe we are
> promoting
>
> proprietary software if they are mentionned under a "Migrate from" label.
> But
>
> the point here about if we can legally use other product names (and if that
>
> is a use of a trademark) in that context is a good one. They are probably
> rules
>
> and good practices to follow in doing so, which can depend on juridictions
> (probably
>
> US law applies here if the site is hosted in the US).
>
> Quickly researching about the topic leads to this article:
>
> https://moz.com/blog/comparative-advertsing-can-i-
> talk-about-my-competitor-on-my-website
>
> The bottom line is that there are legal ways of comparing to a competitor
> (is a
>
> "Migrate from " mention considered as comparative advertising is
> another questio),
>
> but you can still be sued even if you follow the rules, so it is a matter
> of
>
> appreciating the benefit vs the risk. Funnily they recommand to explictly
> mention
>
> that you're not affiliated with the other product owner! (I guess that's
> in the
>
> same vein as the "Caution: Contents Hot" mention on coffee cups ;-))
>
>
>
> I had a quick look at https://www.libreoffice.org/ to see if they for
> example
>
> mentionned MS Office or Google docs. The only mention of MS Office I could
> find
>
> is at the bottom of
>
> https://www.libreoffice.org/discover/libreoffice/ and it is a link to an
> external
>
> site (they do mention the compatibility with Microsft Word, Excel,
> *formats*,
>
> but that's a bit different than comparing to the products themselves).
>
> On http://www.openoffice.org/ similar situation, only mention of MS
> formats,
>
> and for compraisons with MS itself, links to externals reviews from
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/product/reviews.html
>
>
>
> Sandro mentionned GIMP's "like Photoshop, only better" motto but on
>
> https://www.gimp.org/ no mention of Photoshop I could find
>
>
>
> If you go on http://www.pitneybowes.com/us/location-intelligence/
> geographic-information-systems/mapinfo-pro.html,
>
> no mention of ESRI
>
> Same on http://www.hexagongeospatial.com/products/power-portfolio/
> erdas-imagine
>
>
>
> Just trying to decrease the emotional level of the debate with facts ;-)
>
>
>
> --
>
> Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
>
> http://www.spatialys.com
>
>
>
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Sandro Santilli]

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 09:10:52PM +0200, Even Rouault wrote:

> Sandro mentionned GIMP's "like Photoshop, only better" motto but on
> https://www.gimp.org/ no mention of Photoshop I could find

They must have received a call from lawyers.
But I'm sure I didn't dream that motto, or if I did, I was not the
only one: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~srv/tools.html

--strk;
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Stephen Woodbridge]

I just got off the phone with a client that is interested in migrating 
to open source tools. They problem is they don't know where to start. 
They know what proprietary tools they are using, they know what features 
they are using, they know about OSGeo, but rapidly get lost in all the 
projects and what they do and how they might be used to replace what 
they have.


They need :
* a simple mapping from proprietary to FOSS tools, so they can start 
learn more about which tools to investigate.
* simple recipes and direction to get them started, ie: lower the cost 
of entrance.
* list of resources, like mailing lists, where to download, what 
tutorials and/books are available or experts in the various tools they 
are interested.


We need to make this easy for people that are not familiar with FOSS to 
easily find their way into our community. They want to educate 
themselves a little before engaging the community.


I often act as a compass and help guide them to get started, but I only 
know part of the pie.


So migration guides would be good. Some form of mapping products to 
projects would be very useful.


I like the format of Choose Open Source and I think it covers a lot of 
these needs.


-Steve

On 9/21/2017 3:00 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
Thanks that is a great example - this is the roll I hope that 
http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/choose-a-project/ 
 will play (now that 
is actually working correctly).


I am happy to try an experiment and see if this is sufficient, I just do 
not want to lose track of the vision that we are helping non-community 
members connect with open source.


I am sorry this discussion started over links, which look to of been 
added to the beta website by mistake. I do not mind naming competitor 
products, in case studies, migration guides, or "even" on project pages. 
In the case of project pages it is up to each project steering committee 
what they want to do.



--
Jody Garnett

On 21 September 2017 at 08:45, Daniel Kastl > wrote:


I think "Switch2osm" is a very good example how to help migrating to
non-proprietary tools: https://switch2osm.org/
I quickly went through their site and as far as I could see,
competitor names only appear in case studies.
Maybe we could have "switch2foss" in a similar way.

It's a very good idea to help new users to find open alternatives to
the proprietary software they're using right now.
I agree with many here, that this doesn't require to provide links
to them.

Best regards,
Daniel





On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Gert-Jan van der Weijden (OSGeo.nl)
> wrote:

As a regular user of proprietary GIS software (ArcGIS, FME,
Oracle Spatial etcetera) I can assure that it is very valuable
to have some sort of guidance in the diversity of the FOSS
landscape.

I agree that "similar proprietary products" isn't the right
label. However, instead of the proposed "migratte from" (which
sound like a complete migration plan) I'd suggest the label
"comparable proprietary software".

Kind regards,

Gert-Jan



María Arias de Reyna schreef op 21-09-2017 8:30:

On 20 September 2017 at 02:41, Helmut Kudrnovsky
> wrote:


Dear OSGeo community

I want to bring you a discussion on a github
ticket about linking to
"similar proprietary products" [1] to your
attention.

My comment there:

"I support and concur with Venka that the item
"Similar Proprietary
Products" should be removed. There isn't only
one proprietary GIS software
out there, there are several others. IMHO such
comparisons may be part of
e.g. a reviewed scientific paper/elaboration,
where our OSGeo projects - if
they want to - may link to. I see no added value
for OSGeo to serve such
links. As already elsewhere mentioned by me,
reciprocity is the key if such
items are listed, but I can't see this happen. "

I'm pretty much convinced that more effort to
help our OSGeo projects
improving on every level (e.g. documentation,
reach out, testing, etc) is
the key rather than linking to proprietary
software. One of such

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Angelos Tzotsos]

Hi,

The last 3 sentences of this statement make me worry for more future 
conflicts.


What happens when the Marketing Committee (which has the mandate to 
outreach for OSGeo and create the new web site) conflicts with the new 
Website Management Team (part of Systems Administration Committee) on 
the content of the web site?
Which one of these teams gets to decide if the site focuses on our 
community (us) or on bringing in new users (outreach)? Do-ocracy is not 
an option in this case, both groups are willing to act.
Going through the by-laws [1] once again, I see that the only conflict 
resolution process we have in place is a Board resolution.


Just to be clear: I am not against forming the "Website Management 
Team", just trying to be pro-active.


I suggest discussing this matter at the next Board meeting [2]

Best,
Angelos

[1] http://www.osgeo.org/content/foundation/incorporation/bylaws.html
[2] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Board_Meeting_2017-10-05


On 09/21/2017 02:25 PM, Jeff McKenna wrote:
I am setting up an OSGeo "Website Management Team" now, to help bring 
the focus on the OSGeo community, manage the website (and WordPress 
theme), security, backups, content etc, and will propose this to 
OSGeo's Systems committee and OSGeo Board; for the longterm 
maintenance of the website.  I imagine during this maintenance process 
we will be removing these unnecessary promotions, and focus on the 
OSGeo community (us). We'll leave promotion of other things for those 
with the big money ha, as they have the big funding for their 
products, as you mentioned.  We will focus on the OSGeo community.


--
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
Charter Member
Open Source Geospatial Foundation
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Even Rouault]

On jeudi 21 septembre 2017 11:20:54 CEST Jeffrey Johnson wrote:
> We have that kind of page here
> http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/about/migrate-open-source-gis/ ... The
> link was removed from the hero area when Steve Feldman changed this in
> Boston, so there is no content there now.
> 
> Are we not willing to even mention the names of these proprietary
> products for fear of 'promoting' them? Or do we want to present the
> user coming from outside our community some context about which open
> source projects are an analogue or replacement for the proprietary
> products they are already familiar with? Thats the real question in my
> mind.

I cannot honestly think that anyone would seriously believe we are promoting
proprietary software if they are mentionned under a "Migrate from" label. But
the point here about if we can legally use other product names (and if that
is a use of a trademark) in that context is a good one. They are probably rules
and good practices to follow in doing so, which can depend on juridictions 
(probably
US law applies here if the site is hosted in the US). 
Quickly researching about the topic leads to this article:
https://moz.com/blog/comparative-advertsing-can-i-talk-about-my-competitor-on-my-website
The bottom line is that there are legal ways of comparing to a competitor (is a
"Migrate from " mention considered as comparative advertising is another 
questio),
but you can still be sued even if you follow the rules, so it is a matter of
appreciating the benefit vs the risk. Funnily they recommand to explictly 
mention
that you're not affiliated with the other product owner! (I guess that's in the
same vein as the "Caution: Contents Hot" mention on coffee cups ;-))

I had a quick look at https://www.libreoffice.org/ to see if they for example
mentionned MS Office or Google docs. The only mention of MS Office I could find
is at the bottom of
https://www.libreoffice.org/discover/libreoffice/ and it is a link to an 
external
site (they do mention the compatibility with Microsft Word, Excel, *formats*,
but that's a bit different than comparing to the products themselves).
On http://www.openoffice.org/ similar situation, only mention of MS formats,
and for compraisons with MS itself, links to externals reviews from
http://www.openoffice.org/product/reviews.html

Sandro mentionned GIMP's "like Photoshop, only better" motto but on
https://www.gimp.org/ no mention of Photoshop I could find

If you go on 
http://www.pitneybowes.com/us/location-intelligence/geographic-information-systems/mapinfo-pro.html,
no mention of ESRI
Same on http://www.hexagongeospatial.com/products/power-portfolio/erdas-imagine

Just trying to decrease the emotional level of the debate with facts ;-)

-- 
Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
http://www.spatialys.com

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Jody Garnett]

Thanks that is a great example - this is the roll I hope that http://osgeo.
getinteractive.nl/choose-a-project/ will play (now that is actually working
correctly).

I am happy to try an experiment and see if this is sufficient, I just do
not want to lose track of the vision that we are helping non-community
members connect with open source.

I am sorry this discussion started over links, which look to of been added
to the beta website by mistake. I do not mind naming competitor products,
in case studies, migration guides, or "even" on project pages. In the case
of project pages it is up to each project steering committee what they want
to do.


--
Jody Garnett

On 21 September 2017 at 08:45, Daniel Kastl  wrote:

> I think "Switch2osm" is a very good example how to help migrating to
> non-proprietary tools: https://switch2osm.org/
> I quickly went through their site and as far as I could see, competitor
> names only appear in case studies.
> Maybe we could have "switch2foss" in a similar way.
>
> It's a very good idea to help new users to find open alternatives to the
> proprietary software they're using right now.
> I agree with many here, that this doesn't require to provide links to
> them.
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Gert-Jan van der Weijden (OSGeo.nl) <
> gert-...@osgeo.nl> wrote:
>
>> As a regular user of proprietary GIS software (ArcGIS, FME, Oracle
>> Spatial etcetera) I can assure that it is very valuable to have some sort
>> of guidance in the diversity of the FOSS landscape.
>>
>> I agree that "similar proprietary products" isn't the right label.
>> However, instead of the proposed "migratte from" (which sound like a
>> complete migration plan) I'd suggest the label "comparable proprietary
>> software".
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Gert-Jan
>>
>>
>>
>> María Arias de Reyna schreef op 21-09-2017 8:30:
>>
>> On 20 September 2017 at 02:41, Helmut Kudrnovsky  wrote:
>
>>
>> Dear OSGeo community
>>
>> I want to bring you a discussion on a github ticket about linking to
>> "similar proprietary products" [1] to your attention.
>>
>> My comment there:
>>
>> "I support and concur with Venka that the item "Similar Proprietary
>> Products" should be removed. There isn't only one proprietary GIS
>> software
>> out there, there are several others. IMHO such comparisons may be
>> part of
>> e.g. a reviewed scientific paper/elaboration, where our OSGeo
>> projects - if
>> they want to - may link to. I see no added value for OSGeo to serve
>> such
>> links. As already elsewhere mentioned by me, reciprocity is the key
>> if such
>> items are listed, but I can't see this happen. "
>>
>> I'm pretty much convinced that more effort to help our OSGeo projects
>> improving on every level (e.g. documentation, reach out, testing,
>> etc) is
>> the key rather than linking to proprietary software. One of such
>> opportunities may be the upcoming Google Code In (GCI) 2017 e.g. to
>> produce
>> nice screenshots for documentation, produce some fancy videos etc.
>> based on
>> tiny little tasks for students aged 13 to 17. A good invest in the
>> young who
>> will be our OSGeo's future.
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Helmut
>> OSGeo charter member
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/issues/100
>> [2] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-September/036
>> 217.html
>> ___
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>
>
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On my opinion, it makes sense to show relation between propietary and
>>> free and open software. Just because we want to people to migrate to
>>> free and open source software, so it is good if they can search for
>>> the software they are currently using to know what software will they
>>> use. It makes sense, it makes life easier on migrations.
>>>
>>> Said this, I prefer the "Migrate from" label much better. And sure, no
>>> link to the product, just the name. Why would we need a link? If they
>>> don't know what that software is, the information is useless to them.
>>> If they already know what that software is, the information is
>>> redundant. So having a name is fine, having a link is nonsense.
>>>
>>> Is "Migrate from" label aggresive? Not at all. We are OsGeo, we are
>>> promoting FLOSS. Promoting FLOSS means we are encouraging people to
>>> move from propietary to open. That is our philosophy, that is our
>>> motto. If propietary software feels bad because we follow our goals...
>>> well, then maybe they should stop promoting their own software too
>>> because that makes me feel bad.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> María.
>>> ___
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Jody Garnett]

Comments inline:

> Thank you Ben, this is absolutely correct: we have an amazing vibrant
> community, and we need a front-end website that fosters and promotes OSGeo
> projects (especially those in OSGeo incubation as well as OSGeo Community
> projects) and OSGeo initiatives such as the Summer of Code. Period.  Full
> stop.  This is what our community is good at, and why we are so desired
> today.  From experience I can tell you that this struggle, that is being
> put forth here, will just separate our community (you can see it is
> already) and make the community weaker.
>

I am not sure I see this as a struggle Jeff.

Outreach will not weaken our community, it is literally what our community
is for - to advocate for open source. Our vision is: *Empower everyone with
open source geospatial*

If our community focuses only ourselves we will not be meeting our
objective.

Let us help our OSGeo community grow.   Don't worry about competing
> organizations (trust me they are fine, they have big money for marketing
> and teams of people working on that), just focus on OSGeo and our wonderful
> community.
>

I don't think anyone was worried about competing organizations having a
hard time :)

We are worried about individuals that have only ever had a chance to hear
from proprietary software. We want these individuals to have a chance to
hear from us about a better approach to geospatial technology -
specifically to hear about our projects and the benefits of not only using
open source but being part of an open source community.

I am setting up an OSGeo "Website Management Team" now, to help bring the
> focus on the OSGeo community, manage the website (and WordPress theme),
> security, backups, content etc, and will propose this to OSGeo's Systems
> committee and OSGeo Board; for the longterm maintenance of the website.  I
> imagine during this maintenance process we will be removing these
> unnecessary promotions, and focus on the OSGeo community (us). We'll leave
> promotion of other things for those with the big money ha, as they have the
> big funding for their products, as you mentioned.  We will focus on the
> OSGeo community.
>

Jeff we kind of got stuck on this one, the SAC motion to host the beta
website is waiting on your proposal. I assume you got busy with the CRO
responsibilities, do you know when you will be available with a proposal
for SAC to consider?

I would kindly ask you to go over the though behind the website content - I
do not know specifically what you are referring to as unnecessary. If you
are talking about pivoting the website to focus on "us" rather than
promotion and outreach then I am really sad and feel like you have missed
the point of the exercise.
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Jody Garnett]

Thanks Ben, and mentioned above that is why these project pages lead with a
team picture.

Maria offered similar words yesterday. I really like the idea of
emphasizing this aspect on the "what is opensource" page.

Outreach to people who are not part of our community is a challenge; one of
the nice ideas (wish I had the quote) was that people try open source
software because the price is free; we want them to stay because of the
freedom. The opportunity to join the community is a big benefit of OSGeo -
but we should honestly recognize that it is intimidating. The local
chapters is our key way to make this less intimidating and more personal
and supportive.






--
Jody Garnett

On 21 September 2017 at 04:02, Ben Caradoc-Davies  wrote:

> On 21/09/17 19:54, María Arias de Reyna wrote:
>
>> In fact, publishing blog posts comparing closed and FLOSS is also very
>> helpful. If you are doubting what kind of software to use, a good
>> comparison with table feature comparisons is very handy But that
>> should be outside the project page, because we are not begging for
>> users. We are strong projects on our own, we don't need to keep
>> continuously comparing to the closed alternatives for users to know
>> what we do.
>>
>
> Uplifting tweet of the week:
>
> "Jon Kuperman‏ @jkup
> Stop treating open source like a product you purchased and start treating
> it like a team you belong to."
> https://twitter.com/jkup/status/909887066103676928
>
> Referring to proprietary GIS on the OSGeo website risks misleading users
> that OSGeo projects are just competing products. We offer something that
> proprietary GIS never can: the opportunity to join a community of peers.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> --
> Ben Caradoc-Davies 
> Director
> Transient Software Limited 
> New Zealand
>
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Mateusz Loskot]

> On 09/21/2017 06:45 PM, Daniel Kastl wrote:
>
> I think "Switch2osm" is a very good example how to help migrating to
> non-proprietary tools: https://switch2osm.org/
> I quickly went through their site and as far as I could see, competitor
> names only appear in case studies.

What about names and links to providers:
https://switch2osm.org/providers/

Are they all pure open source or some are open core or
perhaps some just offer SaaS based on completely closed software.
Perhaps they are just buzzwording [1] and perhaps they are not, who knows?
Can I trust them about what their SaaS actually runs?
The fact that a company has hundreds of repos on GitHub does not make
it a pure FOSS company.

I've been part of OSGeo since its early post-birth times and
I've never seen a single person here in the Community having slightest problems
with listing (and linking) proprietary vendors as users, contributors, sponsors.

Mind you (all), Google, ESRI etc. are sponsors of OSGeo major event, the FOSS4G.

Mind you (all), tons of OSGeo LOCs was/is funded with monies streamed
from proprietary vendors.
Let's update the next release installer of PostGIS and label such
non-kosher features like PostGIS Raster to allow FOSS-purist skip
them.

The whole thread feels like an internal scramble for external witch hunt.

[1] http://blog.kathyreid.id.au/2010/07/19/open-source-in-name-only/

Best regards,
-- 
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Jeffrey Johnson]

We have that kind of page here
http://osgeo.getinteractive.nl/about/migrate-open-source-gis/ ... The
link was removed from the hero area when Steve Feldman changed this in
Boston, so there is no content there now.

Are we not willing to even mention the names of these proprietary
products for fear of 'promoting' them? Or do we want to present the
user coming from outside our community some context about which open
source projects are an analogue or replacement for the proprietary
products they are already familiar with? Thats the real question in my
mind.

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Angelos Tzotsos  wrote:
> Thank you Daniel,
> +1
>
>
> On 09/21/2017 06:45 PM, Daniel Kastl wrote:
>
> I think "Switch2osm" is a very good example how to help migrating to
> non-proprietary tools: https://switch2osm.org/
> I quickly went through their site and as far as I could see, competitor
> names only appear in case studies.
> Maybe we could have "switch2foss" in a similar way.
>
> It's a very good idea to help new users to find open alternatives to the
> proprietary software they're using right now.
> I agree with many here, that this doesn't require to provide links to them.
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Gert-Jan van der Weijden (OSGeo.nl) <
> gert-...@osgeo.nl> wrote:
>
> As a regular user of proprietary GIS software (ArcGIS, FME, Oracle Spatial
> etcetera) I can assure that it is very valuable to have some sort of
> guidance in the diversity of the FOSS landscape.
>
> I agree that "similar proprietary products" isn't the right label.
> However, instead of the proposed "migratte from" (which sound like a
> complete migration plan) I'd suggest the label "comparable proprietary
> software".
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Gert-Jan
>
>
>
> María Arias de Reyna schreef op 21-09-2017 8:30:
>
> On 20 September 2017 at 02:41, Helmut Kudrnovsky  wrote:
>
> Dear OSGeo community
>
> I want to bring you a discussion on a github ticket about linking to
> "similar proprietary products" [1] to your attention.
>
> My comment there:
>
> "I support and concur with Venka that the item "Similar Proprietary
> Products" should be removed. There isn't only one proprietary GIS
> software
> out there, there are several others. IMHO such comparisons may be part
> of
> e.g. a reviewed scientific paper/elaboration, where our OSGeo projects
> - if
> they want to - may link to. I see no added value for OSGeo to serve
> such
> links. As already elsewhere mentioned by me, reciprocity is the key if
> such
> items are listed, but I can't see this happen. "
>
> I'm pretty much convinced that more effort to help our OSGeo projects
> improving on every level (e.g. documentation, reach out, testing, etc)
> is
> the key rather than linking to proprietary software. One of such
> opportunities may be the upcoming Google Code In (GCI) 2017 e.g. to
> produce
> nice screenshots for documentation, produce some fancy videos etc.
> based on
> tiny little tasks for students aged 13 to 17. A good invest in the
> young who
> will be our OSGeo's future.
>
> Kind regards
> Helmut
> OSGeo charter member
>
> [1] https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/issues/100
> [2] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-September/
> 036217.html
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
> Hi,
>
> On my opinion, it makes sense to show relation between propietary and
> free and open software. Just because we want to people to migrate to
> free and open source software, so it is good if they can search for
> the software they are currently using to know what software will they
> use. It makes sense, it makes life easier on migrations.
>
> Said this, I prefer the "Migrate from" label much better. And sure, no
> link to the product, just the name. Why would we need a link? If they
> don't know what that software is, the information is useless to them.
> If they already know what that software is, the information is
> redundant. So having a name is fine, having a link is nonsense.
>
> Is "Migrate from" label aggresive? Not at all. We are OsGeo, we are
> promoting FLOSS. Promoting FLOSS means we are encouraging people to
> move from propietary to open. That is our philosophy, that is our
> motto. If propietary software feels bad because we follow our goals...
> well, then maybe they should stop promoting their own software too
> because that makes me feel bad.
>
> Regards,
> María.
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Angelos Tzotsos]

Thank you Daniel,
+1

On 09/21/2017 06:45 PM, Daniel Kastl wrote:

I think "Switch2osm" is a very good example how to help migrating to
non-proprietary tools: https://switch2osm.org/
I quickly went through their site and as far as I could see, competitor
names only appear in case studies.
Maybe we could have "switch2foss" in a similar way.

It's a very good idea to help new users to find open alternatives to the
proprietary software they're using right now.
I agree with many here, that this doesn't require to provide links to them.

Best regards,
Daniel





On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Gert-Jan van der Weijden (OSGeo.nl) <
gert-...@osgeo.nl> wrote:


As a regular user of proprietary GIS software (ArcGIS, FME, Oracle Spatial
etcetera) I can assure that it is very valuable to have some sort of
guidance in the diversity of the FOSS landscape.

I agree that "similar proprietary products" isn't the right label.
However, instead of the proposed "migratte from" (which sound like a
complete migration plan) I'd suggest the label "comparable proprietary
software".

Kind regards,

Gert-Jan



María Arias de Reyna schreef op 21-09-2017 8:30:

On 20 September 2017 at 02:41, Helmut Kudrnovsky  wrote:

Dear OSGeo community

I want to bring you a discussion on a github ticket about linking to
"similar proprietary products" [1] to your attention.

My comment there:

"I support and concur with Venka that the item "Similar Proprietary
Products" should be removed. There isn't only one proprietary GIS
software
out there, there are several others. IMHO such comparisons may be part
of
e.g. a reviewed scientific paper/elaboration, where our OSGeo projects
- if
they want to - may link to. I see no added value for OSGeo to serve
such
links. As already elsewhere mentioned by me, reciprocity is the key if
such
items are listed, but I can't see this happen. "

I'm pretty much convinced that more effort to help our OSGeo projects
improving on every level (e.g. documentation, reach out, testing, etc)
is
the key rather than linking to proprietary software. One of such
opportunities may be the upcoming Google Code In (GCI) 2017 e.g. to
produce
nice screenshots for documentation, produce some fancy videos etc.
based on
tiny little tasks for students aged 13 to 17. A good invest in the
young who
will be our OSGeo's future.

Kind regards
Helmut
OSGeo charter member

[1] https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/issues/100
[2] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-September/
036217.html
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss




Hi,

On my opinion, it makes sense to show relation between propietary and
free and open software. Just because we want to people to migrate to
free and open source software, so it is good if they can search for
the software they are currently using to know what software will they
use. It makes sense, it makes life easier on migrations.

Said this, I prefer the "Migrate from" label much better. And sure, no
link to the product, just the name. Why would we need a link? If they
don't know what that software is, the information is useless to them.
If they already know what that software is, the information is
redundant. So having a name is fine, having a link is nonsense.

Is "Migrate from" label aggresive? Not at all. We are OsGeo, we are
promoting FLOSS. Promoting FLOSS means we are encouraging people to
move from propietary to open. That is our philosophy, that is our
motto. If propietary software feels bad because we follow our goals...
well, then maybe they should stop promoting their own software too
because that makes me feel bad.

Regards,
María.
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss






___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss



--
Angelos Tzotsos, PhD
Charter Member
Open Source Geospatial Foundation
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Daniel Kastl]

I think "Switch2osm" is a very good example how to help migrating to
non-proprietary tools: https://switch2osm.org/
I quickly went through their site and as far as I could see, competitor
names only appear in case studies.
Maybe we could have "switch2foss" in a similar way.

It's a very good idea to help new users to find open alternatives to the
proprietary software they're using right now.
I agree with many here, that this doesn't require to provide links to them.

Best regards,
Daniel





On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Gert-Jan van der Weijden (OSGeo.nl) <
gert-...@osgeo.nl> wrote:

> As a regular user of proprietary GIS software (ArcGIS, FME, Oracle Spatial
> etcetera) I can assure that it is very valuable to have some sort of
> guidance in the diversity of the FOSS landscape.
>
> I agree that "similar proprietary products" isn't the right label.
> However, instead of the proposed "migratte from" (which sound like a
> complete migration plan) I'd suggest the label "comparable proprietary
> software".
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Gert-Jan
>
>
>
> María Arias de Reyna schreef op 21-09-2017 8:30:
>
> On 20 September 2017 at 02:41, Helmut Kudrnovsky  wrote:

>
> Dear OSGeo community
>
> I want to bring you a discussion on a github ticket about linking to
> "similar proprietary products" [1] to your attention.
>
> My comment there:
>
> "I support and concur with Venka that the item "Similar Proprietary
> Products" should be removed. There isn't only one proprietary GIS
> software
> out there, there are several others. IMHO such comparisons may be part
> of
> e.g. a reviewed scientific paper/elaboration, where our OSGeo projects
> - if
> they want to - may link to. I see no added value for OSGeo to serve
> such
> links. As already elsewhere mentioned by me, reciprocity is the key if
> such
> items are listed, but I can't see this happen. "
>
> I'm pretty much convinced that more effort to help our OSGeo projects
> improving on every level (e.g. documentation, reach out, testing, etc)
> is
> the key rather than linking to proprietary software. One of such
> opportunities may be the upcoming Google Code In (GCI) 2017 e.g. to
> produce
> nice screenshots for documentation, produce some fancy videos etc.
> based on
> tiny little tasks for students aged 13 to 17. A good invest in the
> young who
> will be our OSGeo's future.
>
> Kind regards
> Helmut
> OSGeo charter member
>
> [1] https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/issues/100
> [2] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-September/
> 036217.html
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>


>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On my opinion, it makes sense to show relation between propietary and
>> free and open software. Just because we want to people to migrate to
>> free and open source software, so it is good if they can search for
>> the software they are currently using to know what software will they
>> use. It makes sense, it makes life easier on migrations.
>>
>> Said this, I prefer the "Migrate from" label much better. And sure, no
>> link to the product, just the name. Why would we need a link? If they
>> don't know what that software is, the information is useless to them.
>> If they already know what that software is, the information is
>> redundant. So having a name is fine, having a link is nonsense.
>>
>> Is "Migrate from" label aggresive? Not at all. We are OsGeo, we are
>> promoting FLOSS. Promoting FLOSS means we are encouraging people to
>> move from propietary to open. That is our philosophy, that is our
>> motto. If propietary software feels bad because we follow our goals...
>> well, then maybe they should stop promoting their own software too
>> because that makes me feel bad.
>>
>> Regards,
>> María.
>> ___
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>



-- 
Georepublic UG & Georepublic Japan
eMail: daniel.ka...@georepublic.de
Web: https://georepublic.info
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Venkatesh Raghavan]

Hi Ben,

Many thanks for your inspiring email and for
bringing the focus back to the community.

As Jeff has also elucidated, the greatest strength of
the OSGeo Foundation is the community that all
of us have helped nurture.

Ben, I eagerly look forward to welcoming you as  as OSGeo
Charter Member [1].

Best

Venka

[1] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/New_Member_Nominations_2017


On 9/21/2017 8:25 PM, Jeff McKenna wrote:

On 2017-09-21 8:02 AM, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:

On 21/09/17 19:54, María Arias de Reyna wrote:

In fact, publishing blog posts comparing closed and FLOSS is also very
helpful. If you are doubting what kind of software to use, a good
comparison with table feature comparisons is very handy But that
should be outside the project page, because we are not begging for
users. We are strong projects on our own, we don't need to keep
continuously comparing to the closed alternatives for users to know
what we do.


Uplifting tweet of the week:

"Jon Kuperman‏ @jkup
Stop treating open source like a product you purchased and start 
treating it like a team you belong to."

https://twitter.com/jkup/status/909887066103676928

Referring to proprietary GIS on the OSGeo website risks misleading 
users that OSGeo projects are just competing products. We offer 
something that proprietary GIS never can: the opportunity to join a 
community of peers.


Kind regards,



Thank you Ben, this is absolutely correct: we have an amazing vibrant 
community, and we need a front-end website that fosters and promotes 
OSGeo projects (especially those in OSGeo incubation as well as OSGeo 
Community projects) and OSGeo initiatives such as the Summer of Code. 
Period.  Full stop.  This is what our community is good at, and why we 
are so desired today.  From experience I can tell you that this 
struggle, that is being put forth here, will just separate our 
community (you can see it is already) and make the community weaker.


Let us help our OSGeo community grow.   Don't worry about competing 
organizations (trust me they are fine, they have big money for 
marketing and teams of people working on that), just focus on OSGeo 
and our wonderful community.


I am setting up an OSGeo "Website Management Team" now, to help bring 
the focus on the OSGeo community, manage the website (and WordPress 
theme), security, backups, content etc, and will propose this to 
OSGeo's Systems committee and OSGeo Board; for the longterm 
maintenance of the website.  I imagine during this maintenance process 
we will be removing these unnecessary promotions, and focus on the 
OSGeo community (us). We'll leave promotion of other things for those 
with the big money ha, as they have the big funding for their 
products, as you mentioned.  We will focus on the OSGeo community.


Thanks Ben,

-jeff



___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Jeff McKenna]

On 2017-09-21 8:02 AM, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:

On 21/09/17 19:54, María Arias de Reyna wrote:

In fact, publishing blog posts comparing closed and FLOSS is also very
helpful. If you are doubting what kind of software to use, a good
comparison with table feature comparisons is very handy But that
should be outside the project page, because we are not begging for
users. We are strong projects on our own, we don't need to keep
continuously comparing to the closed alternatives for users to know
what we do.


Uplifting tweet of the week:

"Jon Kuperman‏ @jkup
Stop treating open source like a product you purchased and start 
treating it like a team you belong to."

https://twitter.com/jkup/status/909887066103676928

Referring to proprietary GIS on the OSGeo website risks misleading users 
that OSGeo projects are just competing products. We offer something that 
proprietary GIS never can: the opportunity to join a community of peers.


Kind regards,



Thank you Ben, this is absolutely correct: we have an amazing vibrant 
community, and we need a front-end website that fosters and promotes 
OSGeo projects (especially those in OSGeo incubation as well as OSGeo 
Community projects) and OSGeo initiatives such as the Summer of Code. 
Period.  Full stop.  This is what our community is good at, and why we 
are so desired today.  From experience I can tell you that this 
struggle, that is being put forth here, will just separate our community 
(you can see it is already) and make the community weaker.


Let us help our OSGeo community grow.   Don't worry about competing 
organizations (trust me they are fine, they have big money for marketing 
and teams of people working on that), just focus on OSGeo and our 
wonderful community.


I am setting up an OSGeo "Website Management Team" now, to help bring 
the focus on the OSGeo community, manage the website (and WordPress 
theme), security, backups, content etc, and will propose this to OSGeo's 
Systems committee and OSGeo Board; for the longterm maintenance of the 
website.  I imagine during this maintenance process we will be removing 
these unnecessary promotions, and focus on the OSGeo community (us). 
We'll leave promotion of other things for those with the big money ha, 
as they have the big funding for their products, as you mentioned.  We 
will focus on the OSGeo community.


Thanks Ben,

-jeff

--
Jeff McKenna
President Emeritus, OSGeo Foundation
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jeff_McKenna



___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Ben Caradoc-Davies]

On 21/09/17 19:54, María Arias de Reyna wrote:

In fact, publishing blog posts comparing closed and FLOSS is also very
helpful. If you are doubting what kind of software to use, a good
comparison with table feature comparisons is very handy But that
should be outside the project page, because we are not begging for
users. We are strong projects on our own, we don't need to keep
continuously comparing to the closed alternatives for users to know
what we do.


Uplifting tweet of the week:

"Jon Kuperman‏ @jkup
Stop treating open source like a product you purchased and start 
treating it like a team you belong to."

https://twitter.com/jkup/status/909887066103676928

Referring to proprietary GIS on the OSGeo website risks misleading users 
that OSGeo projects are just competing products. We offer something that 
proprietary GIS never can: the opportunity to join a community of peers.


Kind regards,

--
Ben Caradoc-Davies 
Director
Transient Software Limited 
New Zealand
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[María Arias de Reyna]

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Helmut Kudrnovsky  wrote:
> Moreover I wonder that no one react on my main sentence:
>
> "I'm pretty much convinced that more effort to help our OSGeo projects
> improving on every level (e.g. documentation, reach out, testing, etc) is
> the key rather than linking to proprietary software. One of such
> opportunities may be the upcoming Google Code In (GCI) 2017 e.g. to produce
> nice screenshots for documentation, produce some fancy videos etc. based on
> tiny little tasks for students aged 13 to 17. A good invest in the young who
> will be our OSGeo's future."


I didn't react to that because I see this conclusion as obviously good
as you see it :) I am not sure if that is the intended purpose of this
type of programs (shouldn't they code?) but for sure, showcases videos
and tutorials are very nice for promoting the software.

In fact, publishing blog posts comparing closed and FLOSS is also very
helpful. If you are doubting what kind of software to use, a good
comparison with table feature comparisons is very handy But that
should be outside the project page, because we are not begging for
users. We are strong projects on our own, we don't need to keep
continuously comparing to the closed alternatives for users to know
what we do.
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Gert-Jan van der Weijden (OSGeo.nl)]

As a regular user of proprietary GIS software (ArcGIS, FME, Oracle 
Spatial etcetera) I can assure that it is very valuable to have some 
sort of guidance in the diversity of the FOSS landscape.


I agree that "similar proprietary products" isn't the right label. 
However, instead of the proposed "migratte from" (which sound like a 
complete migration plan) I'd suggest the label "comparable proprietary 
software".


Kind regards,

Gert-Jan



María Arias de Reyna schreef op 21-09-2017 8:30:
On 20 September 2017 at 02:41, Helmut Kudrnovsky  
wrote:


Dear OSGeo community

I want to bring you a discussion on a github ticket about linking to
"similar proprietary products" [1] to your attention.

My comment there:

"I support and concur with Venka that the item "Similar Proprietary
Products" should be removed. There isn't only one proprietary GIS 
software
out there, there are several others. IMHO such comparisons may be 
part of
e.g. a reviewed scientific paper/elaboration, where our OSGeo 
projects - if
they want to - may link to. I see no added value for OSGeo to serve 
such
links. As already elsewhere mentioned by me, reciprocity is the key 
if such

items are listed, but I can't see this happen. "

I'm pretty much convinced that more effort to help our OSGeo 
projects
improving on every level (e.g. documentation, reach out, testing, 
etc) is

the key rather than linking to proprietary software. One of such
opportunities may be the upcoming Google Code In (GCI) 2017 e.g. to 
produce
nice screenshots for documentation, produce some fancy videos etc. 
based on
tiny little tasks for students aged 13 to 17. A good invest in the 
young who

will be our OSGeo's future.

Kind regards
Helmut
OSGeo charter member

[1] https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/issues/100
[2] 
https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-September/036217.html

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss





Hi,

On my opinion, it makes sense to show relation between propietary and
free and open software. Just because we want to people to migrate to
free and open source software, so it is good if they can search for
the software they are currently using to know what software will they
use. It makes sense, it makes life easier on migrations.

Said this, I prefer the "Migrate from" label much better. And sure, no
link to the product, just the name. Why would we need a link? If they
don't know what that software is, the information is useless to them.
If they already know what that software is, the information is
redundant. So having a name is fine, having a link is nonsense.

Is "Migrate from" label aggresive? Not at all. We are OsGeo, we are
promoting FLOSS. Promoting FLOSS means we are encouraging people to
move from propietary to open. That is our philosophy, that is our
motto. If propietary software feels bad because we follow our goals...
well, then maybe they should stop promoting their own software too
because that makes me feel bad.

Regards,
María.
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Helmut Kudrnovsky]

Maria,

I agree with you, presenting links to proprietary software on the OSGeo website is nonsense.

I've just reread my initial mail and I can't see anything in it against support for migration.

Moreover I wonder that no one react on my main sentence:

"I'm pretty much convinced that more effort to help our OSGeo projects improving on every level (e.g. documentation, reach out, testing, etc) is the key rather than linking to proprietary software. One of such opportunities may be the upcoming Google Code In (GCI) 2017 e.g. to produce nice screenshots for documentation, produce some fancy videos etc. based on tiny little tasks for students aged 13 to 17. A good invest in the young who will be our OSGeo's future."

If you understand and know nowadays click-and-read behavior of internet users, the mean time to stay on a website is about 5 seconds.

If you want to foster migration and keep website visitors' attention high, fancy and catchy screenshots of use cases, short videos of cool stuff with open data etc etc etc is highly effective. 

Hakuna Matata
Helmut
-- Am 21.09.17, 08:30, "María Arias de Reyna"  schrieb:
>> On 20 September 2017 at 02:41, Helmut Kudrnovsky  wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear OSGeo community
>>>
>>> I want to bring you a discussion on a github ticket about linking to
>>> "similar proprietary products" [1] to your attention.
>>>
>>> My comment there:
>>>
>>> "I support and concur with Venka that the item "Similar Proprietary
>>> Products" should be removed. There isn't only one proprietary GIS software
>>> out there, there are several others. IMHO such comparisons may be part of
>>> e.g. a reviewed scientific paper/elaboration, where our OSGeo projects - if
>>> they want to - may link to. I see no added value for OSGeo to serve such
>>> links. As already elsewhere mentioned by me, reciprocity is the key if such
>>> items are listed, but I can't see this happen. "
>>>
>>> I'm pretty much convinced that more effort to help our OSGeo projects
>>> improving on every level (e.g. documentation, reach out, testing, etc) is
>>> the key rather than linking to proprietary software. One of such
>>> opportunities may be the upcoming Google Code In (GCI) 2017 e.g. to produce
>>> nice screenshots for documentation, produce some fancy videos etc. based on
>>> tiny little tasks for students aged 13 to 17. A good invest in the young who
>>> will be our OSGeo's future.
>>>
>>> Kind regards
>>> Helmut
>>> OSGeo charter member
>>>
>>> [1] https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/issues/100
>>> [2] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-September/036217.html
>>> ___
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
Hi,
On my opinion, it makes sense to show relation between propietary and
free and open software. Just because we want to people to migrate to
free and open source software, so it is good if they can search for
the software they are currently using to know what software will they
use. It makes sense, it makes life easier on migrations.
Said this, I prefer the "Migrate from" label much better. And sure, no
link to the product, just the name. Why would we need a link? If they
don't know what that software is, the information is useless to them.
If they already know what that software is, the information is
redundant. So having a name is fine, having a link is nonsense.
Is "Migrate from" label aggresive? Not at all. We are OsGeo, we are
promoting FLOSS. Promoting FLOSS means we are encouraging people to
move from propietary to open. That is our philosophy, that is our
motto. If propietary software feels bad because we follow our goals...
well, then maybe they should stop promoting their own software too
because that makes me feel bad.
Regards,
María.


___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[María Arias de Reyna]

>> On 20 September 2017 at 02:41, Helmut Kudrnovsky  wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear OSGeo community
>>>
>>> I want to bring you a discussion on a github ticket about linking to
>>> "similar proprietary products" [1] to your attention.
>>>
>>> My comment there:
>>>
>>> "I support and concur with Venka that the item "Similar Proprietary
>>> Products" should be removed. There isn't only one proprietary GIS software
>>> out there, there are several others. IMHO such comparisons may be part of
>>> e.g. a reviewed scientific paper/elaboration, where our OSGeo projects - if
>>> they want to - may link to. I see no added value for OSGeo to serve such
>>> links. As already elsewhere mentioned by me, reciprocity is the key if such
>>> items are listed, but I can't see this happen. "
>>>
>>> I'm pretty much convinced that more effort to help our OSGeo projects
>>> improving on every level (e.g. documentation, reach out, testing, etc) is
>>> the key rather than linking to proprietary software. One of such
>>> opportunities may be the upcoming Google Code In (GCI) 2017 e.g. to produce
>>> nice screenshots for documentation, produce some fancy videos etc. based on
>>> tiny little tasks for students aged 13 to 17. A good invest in the young who
>>> will be our OSGeo's future.
>>>
>>> Kind regards
>>> Helmut
>>> OSGeo charter member
>>>
>>> [1] https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/issues/100
>>> [2] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-September/036217.html
>>> ___
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>


Hi,

On my opinion, it makes sense to show relation between propietary and
free and open software. Just because we want to people to migrate to
free and open source software, so it is good if they can search for
the software they are currently using to know what software will they
use. It makes sense, it makes life easier on migrations.

Said this, I prefer the "Migrate from" label much better. And sure, no
link to the product, just the name. Why would we need a link? If they
don't know what that software is, the information is useless to them.
If they already know what that software is, the information is
redundant. So having a name is fine, having a link is nonsense.

Is "Migrate from" label aggresive? Not at all. We are OsGeo, we are
promoting FLOSS. Promoting FLOSS means we are encouraging people to
move from propietary to open. That is our philosophy, that is our
motto. If propietary software feels bad because we follow our goals...
well, then maybe they should stop promoting their own software too
because that makes me feel bad.

Regards,
María.
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Jody Garnett]

Thanks Maria, and I apologize for getting upset. I would like a chance to
listen to people and determine a course of action together.

--
Jody Garnett

On 20 September 2017 at 12:59, Maria Antonia Brovelli <
maria.brove...@polimi.it> wrote:

> This is my last mail on this topic, because it is stupid to go ahead in
> this conversation and I don't want to become upset. I want only to
> highlight that what you call "social pressure" is simply to listening to
> the community thoughts. Community is more than a beautiful picture of
> people... Thanks Jody and have a good night.
> Maria
>
>
>
> Inviato dal mio dispositivo Samsung
>
>
>  Messaggio originale 
> Da: Jody Garnett <jody.garn...@gmail.com>
> Data: 20/09/17 21:46 (GMT+01:00)
> A: Helmut Kudrnovsky <hel...@web.de>
> Cc: OSGeo Discussions <discuss@lists.osgeo.org>
> Oggetto: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website
>
> Okay folks this conversation thread is starting to make me upset; we have
> gone from a productive discussion and has escalated.
>
> To be clear we have an open bug report, the specific feature is part of
> the website template and I do not have the ability to edit it directly.
> Listing "migrate from" is optional and project leaders can change this page
> to reflect the area in which they work.
>
> This conversation appears to be missing the point of the exercise of the
> website as a whole and applying social pressure to get-something-to-change.
>
> I do not believe social pressure is an effective tool:
> - Are you actually offended and speaking from personal feeling? If so can
> you explain more how you feel we need to balance the communication goals of
> the website vs your feelings as community member
> - Are you applying social pressure to have this "Migrate to" information
> removed? I am interested in respecting the project leadership (who has
> control of these pages) and the marketing committee (who has an outreach
> responsibility). I feel that listening, rather than social pressure, is a
> good way to make responsible decisions.
> - Are you thinking ahead to how a specific community, say the QGIS
> community in this case, may feel about having "Migrate from: ArcMap,
> MapInfo" on this page? If so you are correct this original bug report came
> from the QGIS community, and I hope it has been addressed. I think the QGIS
> community offers a far better experience both in support and freedom then
> the alternatives listed. This initial information is provided by each PSC,
> and if we could get our LDAP working it would be their responsibility to
> edit or remove on a case by case basis, there should be no cause for
> projects to be offended.
> - Are you concerned about inviting comparison to open source to
> proprietary at all? If so you are a bit stuck as we have an outreach
> mandate at OSGeo. If you have specific concerns about comparison we can
> address them, and help write the "why open source" page explaining that
> open source is a much better way to geo :)
>
> Please be respectful of the contributors working on the website/rebranding
> and during the foss4g sprint.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
> On 20 September 2017 at 02:41, Helmut Kudrnovsky <hel...@web.de> wrote:
>
>> Dear OSGeo community
>>
>> I want to bring you a discussion on a github ticket about linking to
>> "similar proprietary products" [1] to your attention.
>>
>> My comment there:
>>
>> "I support and concur with Venka that the item "Similar Proprietary
>> Products" should be removed. There isn't only one proprietary GIS software
>> out there, there are several others. IMHO such comparisons may be part of
>> e.g. a reviewed scientific paper/elaboration, where our OSGeo projects - if
>> they want to - may link to. I see no added value for OSGeo to serve such
>> links. As already elsewhere mentioned by me, reciprocity is the key if such
>> items are listed, but I can't see this happen. "
>>
>> I'm pretty much convinced that more effort to help our OSGeo projects
>> improving on every level (e.g. documentation, reach out, testing, etc) is
>> the key rather than linking to proprietary software. One of such
>> opportunities may be the upcoming Google Code In (GCI) 2017 e.g. to produce
>> nice screenshots for documentation, produce some fancy videos etc. based on
>> tiny little tasks for students aged 13 to 17. A good invest in the young
>> who will be our OSGeo's future.
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Helmut
>> OSGeo charter member
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/issues/100
>> [2] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-September/036217.html
>> ___
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Jody Garnett]

Okay folks this conversation thread is starting to make me upset; we have
gone from a productive discussion and has escalated.

To be clear we have an open bug report, the specific feature is part of the
website template and I do not have the ability to edit it directly. Listing
"migrate from" is optional and project leaders can change this page to
reflect the area in which they work.

This conversation appears to be missing the point of the exercise of the
website as a whole and applying social pressure to get-something-to-change.

I do not believe social pressure is an effective tool:
- Are you actually offended and speaking from personal feeling? If so can
you explain more how you feel we need to balance the communication goals of
the website vs your feelings as community member
- Are you applying social pressure to have this "Migrate to" information
removed? I am interested in respecting the project leadership (who has
control of these pages) and the marketing committee (who has an outreach
responsibility). I feel that listening, rather than social pressure, is a
good way to make responsible decisions.
- Are you thinking ahead to how a specific community, say the QGIS
community in this case, may feel about having "Migrate from: ArcMap,
MapInfo" on this page? If so you are correct this original bug report came
from the QGIS community, and I hope it has been addressed. I think the QGIS
community offers a far better experience both in support and freedom then
the alternatives listed. This initial information is provided by each PSC,
and if we could get our LDAP working it would be their responsibility to
edit or remove on a case by case basis, there should be no cause for
projects to be offended.
- Are you concerned about inviting comparison to open source to proprietary
at all? If so you are a bit stuck as we have an outreach mandate at OSGeo.
If you have specific concerns about comparison we can address them, and
help write the "why open source" page explaining that open source is a much
better way to geo :)

Please be respectful of the contributors working on the website/rebranding
and during the foss4g sprint.




--
Jody Garnett

On 20 September 2017 at 02:41, Helmut Kudrnovsky  wrote:

> Dear OSGeo community
>
> I want to bring you a discussion on a github ticket about linking to
> "similar proprietary products" [1] to your attention.
>
> My comment there:
>
> "I support and concur with Venka that the item "Similar Proprietary
> Products" should be removed. There isn't only one proprietary GIS software
> out there, there are several others. IMHO such comparisons may be part of
> e.g. a reviewed scientific paper/elaboration, where our OSGeo projects - if
> they want to - may link to. I see no added value for OSGeo to serve such
> links. As already elsewhere mentioned by me, reciprocity is the key if such
> items are listed, but I can't see this happen. "
>
> I'm pretty much convinced that more effort to help our OSGeo projects
> improving on every level (e.g. documentation, reach out, testing, etc) is
> the key rather than linking to proprietary software. One of such
> opportunities may be the upcoming Google Code In (GCI) 2017 e.g. to produce
> nice screenshots for documentation, produce some fancy videos etc. based on
> tiny little tasks for students aged 13 to 17. A good invest in the young
> who will be our OSGeo's future.
>
> Kind regards
> Helmut
> OSGeo charter member
>
> [1] https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/issues/100
> [2] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-September/036217.html
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

[OSGeo-Discuss] Proprietary GIS on our OSGeo website

[Helmut Kudrnovsky]

Dear OSGeo community
 
I want to bring you a discussion on a github ticket about linking to "similar 
proprietary products" [1] to your attention.
 
My comment there:
 
"I support and concur with Venka that the item "Similar Proprietary Products" 
should be removed. There isn't only one proprietary GIS software out there, 
there are several others. IMHO such comparisons may be part of e.g. a reviewed 
scientific paper/elaboration, where our OSGeo projects - if they want to - may 
link to. I see no added value for OSGeo to serve such links. As already 
elsewhere mentioned by me, reciprocity is the key if such items are listed, but 
I can't see this happen. "
 
I'm pretty much convinced that more effort to help our OSGeo projects improving 
on every level (e.g. documentation, reach out, testing, etc) is the key rather 
than linking to proprietary software. One of such opportunities may be the 
upcoming Google Code In (GCI) 2017 e.g. to produce nice screenshots for 
documentation, produce some fancy videos etc. based on tiny little tasks for 
students aged 13 to 17. A good invest in the young who will be our OSGeo's 
future.
 
Kind regards
Helmut
OSGeo charter member
 
[1] https://github.com/OSGeo/osgeo/issues/100
[2] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/discuss/2017-September/036217.html
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss