QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
29 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

Peter Petrik

Dear PSC,


We have published a QEP [1] as follow up of our discussions in A Coruña and mailing-list [2] about the topic of transfer of qgis-mac-packager MacOS packaging system to QGIS.org


Envisioned solution offers CI (travis) that builds the package on every commit and therefore could be managed similarly to every other QGIS development. It is not dependent on any external Mac Server and will very likely to be more convenient for other people from QGIS community to contribute. Denis Rouzaud can join the initiative and work on CI integration part if this motion go forwards. We estimate the effort at 20 days. Considering the incertitude regarding the CI part, we add a security margin of 5 days which will invoiced only if used.


We tried to crowdfund the first part of transition, but we managed to receive just about 50% of the desired amount. Therefore we do not see much potential to try again crowdfunding. We will continue to support and release the unofficial Lutra package until October 2019.


If PSC see some ways forward with this motion, Lutra Consulting will be more than happy to implement the proposed solution together with OPENGIS.ch.


We appreciate to have the discussion to the point(s) raised in this email and related to this QEP.


Peter, Saber and Denis

[1] https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals/issues/143

_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

Alessandro Pasotti-2

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 3:26 PM Peter Petrik <[hidden email]> wrote:

Dear PSC,


We have published a QEP [1] as follow up of our discussions in A Coruña and mailing-list [2] about the topic of transfer of qgis-mac-packager MacOS packaging system to QGIS.org


Envisioned solution offers CI (travis) that builds the package on every commit and therefore could be managed similarly to every other QGIS development. It is not dependent on any external Mac Server and will very likely to be more convenient for other people from QGIS community to contribute. Denis Rouzaud can join the initiative and work on CI integration part if this motion go forwards. We estimate the effort at 20 days. Considering the incertitude regarding the CI part, we add a security margin of 5 days which will invoiced only if used.


We tried to crowdfund the first part of transition, but we managed to receive just about 50% of the desired amount. Therefore we do not see much potential to try again crowdfunding. We will continue to support and release the unofficial Lutra package until October 2019.


If PSC see some ways forward with this motion, Lutra Consulting will be more than happy to implement the proposed solution together with OPENGIS.ch.


We appreciate to have the discussion to the point(s) raised in this email and related to this QEP.


Peter, Saber and Denis

[1] https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals/issues/143
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc


Ok I know this may sound heretic (please don't send me to the stake or my kids will starve), but did you consider selling the Mac packages for a small fee?

I mean it's absolutely fair that you require a compensation for all you hard work on the Mac stuff, you well deserve it, but I'm not sure this should be on the general QGIS.org budget.

The rationale is that the we all know the reasons why developing on Mac is so expensive (well, Mac is so expensive in general) and I think that Mac users should pay for the most of it, not all the users.


--
Alessandro Pasotti
w3:   www.itopen.it

_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

Saber Razmjooei
Hi Alessandro,


We have some altruistic motives :)

Seriously though, from business point of view, it is not something we want to pursue. We have an obligation to keep the current packages going until October this year. After that, if nothing is decided, we will plan to shut down the whole thing. All the noise is to make sure, the effort is not lost!

I can understand if QGIS does not want to handle macOS. But, as a the application is becoming more and more popular, the "expectation" is to have the packages working on all major platforms. More users, bigger community, more bug reports, more funded feature requests, more sponsorship...better brand/name. Not all of those fit with one single QGIS core organisation.

Kind regards
Saber


On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 at 14:39, Alessandro Pasotti <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 3:26 PM Peter Petrik <[hidden email]> wrote:

Dear PSC,


We have published a QEP [1] as follow up of our discussions in A Coruña and mailing-list [2] about the topic of transfer of qgis-mac-packager MacOS packaging system to QGIS.org


Envisioned solution offers CI (travis) that builds the package on every commit and therefore could be managed similarly to every other QGIS development. It is not dependent on any external Mac Server and will very likely to be more convenient for other people from QGIS community to contribute. Denis Rouzaud can join the initiative and work on CI integration part if this motion go forwards. We estimate the effort at 20 days. Considering the incertitude regarding the CI part, we add a security margin of 5 days which will invoiced only if used.


We tried to crowdfund the first part of transition, but we managed to receive just about 50% of the desired amount. Therefore we do not see much potential to try again crowdfunding. We will continue to support and release the unofficial Lutra package until October 2019.


If PSC see some ways forward with this motion, Lutra Consulting will be more than happy to implement the proposed solution together with OPENGIS.ch.


We appreciate to have the discussion to the point(s) raised in this email and related to this QEP.


Peter, Saber and Denis

[1] https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals/issues/143
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc


Ok I know this may sound heretic (please don't send me to the stake or my kids will starve), but did you consider selling the Mac packages for a small fee?

I mean it's absolutely fair that you require a compensation for all you hard work on the Mac stuff, you well deserve it, but I'm not sure this should be on the general QGIS.org budget.

The rationale is that the we all know the reasons why developing on Mac is so expensive (well, Mac is so expensive in general) and I think that Mac users should pay for the most of it, not all the users.


--
Alessandro Pasotti
w3:   www.itopen.it
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc


--
Saber Razmjooei
www.lutraconsulting.co.uk
+44 (0)7568 129733

_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

Tim Sutton-6
In reply to this post by Alessandro Pasotti-2
Hi

On 26 Mar 2019, at 14:39, Alessandro Pasotti <[hidden email]> wrote:



Ok I know this may sound heretic (please don't send me to the stake or my kids will starve), but did you consider selling the Mac packages for a small fee?

I mean it's absolutely fair that you require a compensation for all you hard work on the Mac stuff, you well deserve it, but I'm not sure this should be on the general QGIS.org budget.

The rationale is that the we all know the reasons why developing on Mac is so expensive (well, Mac is so expensive in general) and I think that Mac users should pay for the most of it, not all the users.

As a totally biased MacOS user I’m -1 for this. I don’t think supporting packages on Windows or Linux is really any cheaper, just that we had a willing volunteer (Jürgen and others for other Linux derivatives) who contributed a lot of effort for free. I would really not like to see that we single out one platform and start charging for packages it.

Regards

Tim


 




---

Tim Sutton





_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

ginetto
I'm not in general in favor of fees on a free (as freedom) project, but in win or linux env, we do not have to pay Apple to sign the application of buy a dedicated hardware to perform CI! (revolutionary tax)
I'm in favor of a fee considering the fact that OSX (not mac) users didn't want to crowdfund the packaging of support OSX costs for CI (mostly US market). In Win env (now) there is a good dev community that can compile and help build documentation and debug. The only effort on OSX package is lutra's contribution (AFAIK) => there is no a fair balance!
IMHO spend project funds to a packaging process that nor their user want to support is like continuing to give support to QGIS package for Win XP that is no supported nor by M$.

More, with Apple moving more to an entertainment company we should consider it carefully... IMHO project funds for a packaging that are strictly dependent to commercial decisions is too risky! (remember all harware lost changing apple powerPC to intel processors 10 years ago).

my2c

Luigi Pirelli

**************************************************************************************************
* LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/luigipirelli
* Stackexchange: http://gis.stackexchange.com/users/19667/luigi-pirelli
* GitHub: https://github.com/luipir
* Mastering QGIS 2nd Edition:
* https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/mastering-qgis-second-edition
* Hire me: http://goo.gl/BYRQKg
**************************************************************************************************


On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 at 16:36, Tim Sutton <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi

On 26 Mar 2019, at 14:39, Alessandro Pasotti <[hidden email]> wrote:



Ok I know this may sound heretic (please don't send me to the stake or my kids will starve), but did you consider selling the Mac packages for a small fee?

I mean it's absolutely fair that you require a compensation for all you hard work on the Mac stuff, you well deserve it, but I'm not sure this should be on the general QGIS.org budget.

The rationale is that the we all know the reasons why developing on Mac is so expensive (well, Mac is so expensive in general) and I think that Mac users should pay for the most of it, not all the users.

As a totally biased MacOS user I’m -1 for this. I don’t think supporting packages on Windows or Linux is really any cheaper, just that we had a willing volunteer (Jürgen and others for other Linux derivatives) who contributed a lot of effort for free. I would really not like to see that we single out one platform and start charging for packages it.

Regards

Tim


 




---

Tim Sutton




_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc

_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

pcav
Hi all,
not being an oSX user, I'm not directly interested in this subject, but
I think it is an interesting case in the transformation of our project.
Of course any company is free to package and sell QGIS (this as
everybody knows is one of the fundamental GPL freedoms). I am not sure
this would be of direct interest for the project though. If it is, we
could have ad hoc donation channels for each OS packaging, but I think
embarking in this will not be easy.
What would make me uneasy is to grant different treatment to our users
choosing different OSs (free OSs are a special case in this regards) or
to our packagers.
All the best.

On 26/03/19 17:08, Luigi Pirelli wrote:

> I'm not in general in favor of fees on a free (as freedom) project,
> but in win or linux env, we do not have to pay Apple to sign the
> application of buy a dedicated hardware to perform CI! (revolutionary tax)
> I'm in favor of a fee considering the fact that OSX (not mac) users
> didn't want to crowdfund the packaging of support OSX costs for CI
> (mostly US market). In Win env (now) there is a good dev community that
> can compile and help build documentation and debug. The only effort on
> OSX package is lutra's contribution (AFAIK) => there is no a fair balance!
> IMHO spend project funds to a packaging process that nor their user want
> to support is like continuing to give support to QGIS package for Win XP
> that is no supported nor by M$.
>
> More, with Apple moving more to an entertainment company we should
> consider it carefully... IMHO project funds for a packaging that are
> strictly dependent to commercial decisions is too risky! (remember all
> harware lost changing apple powerPC to intel processors 10 years ago).
>
> my2c
>
> Luigi Pirelli
>
> **************************************************************************************************
> * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/luigipirelli
> * Stackexchange: http://gis.stackexchange.com/users/19667/luigi-pirelli
> * GitHub: https://github.com/luipir
> * Mastering QGIS 2nd Edition:
> *
> https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/mastering-qgis-second-edition
> * Hire me: http://goo.gl/BYRQKg
> **************************************************************************************************
>
>
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 at 16:36, Tim Sutton <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Hi
>
>>     On 26 Mar 2019, at 14:39, Alessandro Pasotti <[hidden email]
>>     <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     Ok I know this may sound heretic (please don't send me to the
>>     stake or my kids will starve), but did you consider selling the
>>     Mac packages for a small fee?
>>
>>     I mean it's absolutely fair that you require a compensation for
>>     all you hard work on the Mac stuff, you well deserve it, but I'm
>>     not sure this should be on the general QGIS.org <http://QGIS.org>
>>     budget.
>>
>>     The rationale is that the we all know the reasons why developing
>>     on Mac is so expensive (well, Mac is so expensive in general) and
>>     I think that Mac users should pay for the most of it, not all the
>>     users.
>
>     As a totally biased MacOS user I’m -1 for this. I don’t think
>     supporting packages on Windows or Linux is really any cheaper, just
>     that we had a willing volunteer (Jürgen and others for other Linux
>     derivatives) who contributed a lot of effort for free. I would
>     really not like to see that we single out one platform and start
>     charging for packages it.
>
>     Regards
>
>     Tim
>
>
>      
>
>
>
>
>     ---
>
>     *Tim Sutton*
>     [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Qgis-psc mailing list
>     [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>     https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>

--
Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
QGIS.ORG Chair:
http://planet.qgis.org/planet/user/28/tag/qgis%20board/
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

Richard Duivenvoorde
In reply to this post by Saber Razmjooei
On 26/03/2019 16.28, Saber Razmjooei wrote:

> Hi Alessandro,
>
> We have some altruistic motives :)
>
> Seriously though, from business point of view, it is not something we
> want to pursue. We have an obligation to keep the current packages going
> until October this year. After that, if nothing is decided, we will plan
> to shut down the whole thing. All the noise is to make sure, the effort
> is not lost!
>
> I can understand if QGIS does not want to handle macOS. But, as a the
> application is becoming more and more popular, the "expectation" is to
> have the packages working on all major platforms. More users, bigger
> community, more bug reports, more funded feature requests, more
> sponsorship...better brand/name. Not all of those fit with one single
> QGIS core organisation.

Are we talking about starting QGIS Inc. here :-)

20K (als about 20% percentage of project year income) for a commercial
OS installer is pretty expensive. Not sure how many Mac downloads we
have, but if a 'commercial' crowd source campaign did not help, if no
commercial supplier for this commercial OS is willing to step in, why
should a non-commercial project then bleed for it? I just don't agree
that we have to offer all platforms installers if these only can survive
if we spend $$$ cash to it.

Please spend that 20K on fixing bugs, and let the 'MacOS' community step
in to create an easier package if the KingChaos one is not 'good
enough'. I think it is not fair to spend that much of money on one
installer when others get/ask nothing for their work creating the same
kind of installers.

And IF the FOSS world is changing in a way that only $$$ can make things
happen, then we are starting to look too much like a business/enterprise
in my opinion. I got the same feeling when there were discussions about
the number of releases recently. To me it started to feel like a voting
to demand instead of asking for change.
Are we still a FOSS-project where people do their work for 'fun'  and
partly to get a living from it, or are we moving to a commercial entity
in which the money part is the most important? To me it is still the first.

It is important to have a good separation between 'community'-stuff, and
work that is done because users/companies ask for it. I think the
crowdfunding campaigns are a good thing: if users or important group of
users want something, dev's can offer it and it can be 'bought'.
But if a campaign fails: is it still worth the money?

I'm also aware that we are a heterogeneous community, so my view could
be rather extreme/idealistic compared to others. But I think one of the
strength's of QGIS is/was the community, we should foster it; we should
take care that we are not starting to act like a money-run business.
People are free to start QGIS-based-business's, but please do not use
the community for it.

Regards,

Richard Duivenvoorde
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

Anita Graser


On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 9:51 PM Richard Duivenvoorde <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 26/03/2019 16.28, Saber Razmjooei wrote:
> I can understand if QGIS does not want to handle macOS. But, as a the
> application is becoming more and more popular, the "expectation" is to
> have the packages working on all major platforms. More users, bigger
> community, more bug reports, more funded feature requests, more
> sponsorship...better brand/name. Not all of those fit with one single
> QGIS core organisation.

if users or important group of
users want something, dev's can offer it and it can be 'bought'.
But if a campaign fails: is it still worth the money?

Mhm, how about a QGIS Mac User Group? They would have to pretty much become Platinum sustaining member though. ... Yeah, our first Platinum supporter! :-D

Anita


 

_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

Nyall Dawson
In reply to this post by ginetto
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 at 02:09, Luigi Pirelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I'm not in general in favor of fees on a free (as freedom) project, but in win or linux env, we do not have to pay Apple to sign the application of buy a dedicated hardware to perform CI! (revolutionary tax)
> I'm in favor of a fee considering the fact that OSX (not mac) users didn't want to crowdfund the packaging of support OSX costs for CI (mostly US market). In Win env (now) there is a good dev community that can compile and help build documentation and debug. The only effort on OSX package is lutra's contribution (AFAIK) => there is no a fair balance!
> IMHO spend project funds to a packaging process that nor their user want to support is like continuing to give support to QGIS package for Win XP that is no supported nor by M$.
>
> More, with Apple moving more to an entertainment company we should consider it carefully... IMHO project funds for a packaging that are strictly dependent to commercial decisions is too risky! (remember all harware lost changing apple powerPC to intel processors 10 years ago).

Can I respectful ask that we leave ALL consideration of Apple as a
company out of these discussions? I don't think they are relevant in
any way for our end users, or their experience and utility of QGIS.

This is obviously a tricky discussion, but this is a public forum and
we should avoid all negative talk about MacOS, Apple, and especially
the users of this platform. We have (and always will have) users on
MacOS, and we should keep the discussion focused entirely on how we as
a project can best serve these valued users, and the
technical/financial approach needed to give them a good QGIS
experience.

Nyall


>
> my2c
>
> Luigi Pirelli
>
> **************************************************************************************************
> * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/luigipirelli
> * Stackexchange: http://gis.stackexchange.com/users/19667/luigi-pirelli
> * GitHub: https://github.com/luipir
> * Mastering QGIS 2nd Edition:
> * https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/mastering-qgis-second-edition
> * Hire me: http://goo.gl/BYRQKg
> **************************************************************************************************
>
>
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 at 16:36, Tim Sutton <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> On 26 Mar 2019, at 14:39, Alessandro Pasotti <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Ok I know this may sound heretic (please don't send me to the stake or my kids will starve), but did you consider selling the Mac packages for a small fee?
>>
>> I mean it's absolutely fair that you require a compensation for all you hard work on the Mac stuff, you well deserve it, but I'm not sure this should be on the general QGIS.org budget.
>>
>> The rationale is that the we all know the reasons why developing on Mac is so expensive (well, Mac is so expensive in general) and I think that Mac users should pay for the most of it, not all the users.
>>
>>
>> As a totally biased MacOS user I’m -1 for this. I don’t think supporting packages on Windows or Linux is really any cheaper, just that we had a willing volunteer (Jürgen and others for other Linux derivatives) who contributed a lot of effort for free. I would really not like to see that we single out one platform and start charging for packages it.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Tim
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Tim Sutton
>> [hidden email]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qgis-psc mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

Nyall Dawson
In reply to this post by Peter Petrik
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 at 00:26, Peter Petrik
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> We tried to crowdfund the first part of transition, but we managed to receive just about 50% of the desired amount. Therefore we do not see much potential to try again crowdfunding. We will continue to support and release the unofficial Lutra package until October 2019.

I wonder about this. I think Lutra has well and truly demonstrated
their ability to deliver a stable all-in-one installer for users. My
gut feeling is that a second round of fund raising in 6 months would
likely see a good percentage of the remaining funds raised. But that's
just a hunch based on my experiences with the QGIS marketplace.

Nyall
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

Tim Sutton-6
In reply to this post by Nyall Dawson
Hi



On 26 Mar 2019, at 23:30, Nyall Dawson <[hidden email]> wrote:



Can I respectful ask that we leave ALL consideration of Apple as a
company out of these discussions? I don't think they are relevant in
any way for our end users, or their experience and utility of QGIS.

This is obviously a tricky discussion, but this is a public forum and
we should avoid all negative talk about MacOS, Apple, and especially
the users of this platform. We have (and always will have) users on
MacOS, and we should keep the discussion focused entirely on how we as
a project can best serve these valued users, and the
technical/financial approach needed to give them a good QGIS
experience.

100% agreed - our users on all platforms should not be disrespected for their choice. 

Regards

Tim








Tim Sutton

Co-founder: Kartoza
Ex Project chair: QGIS.org

Visit http://kartoza.com to find out about open source:

Desktop GIS programming services
Geospatial web development
GIS Training
Consulting Services

Skype: timlinux 
IRC: timlinux on #qgis at freenode.net

I'd love to connect. Here's my calendar link to make finding time easy.


_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

Nyall Dawson
In reply to this post by Richard Duivenvoorde
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 at 06:51, Richard Duivenvoorde <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> And IF the FOSS world is changing in a way that only $$$ can make things
> happen, then we are starting to look too much like a business/enterprise
> in my opinion. I got the same feeling when there were discussions about
> the number of releases recently. To me it started to feel like a voting
> to demand instead of asking for change.
> Are we still a FOSS-project where people do their work for 'fun'  and
> partly to get a living from it, or are we moving to a commercial entity
> in which the money part is the most important? To me it is still the first.

My 2c: we passed this point 3 years ago. For better or worse. I think
better. The reality is that the most successful and respected open
source projects all have strong commercial backing behind them (I'd
love to see an exception here... but I'm not aware of any). The more
hours people work on QGIS, the more they NEED finances to make this
possible. There's no escape from our capital driven society...

The trick is balancing being a professional, finance driven project
whilst still encouraging donations of code and new community members.
If we discourage commercial investment and the sponsored work of
Lutra, North Road, OpenGIS, Oslandia, 3liz, camptocamp, Sourcepole,
iMhere Asia, etc then we won't have anywhere near the activity we see
today. For many of us it's no longer a "partly to get a living"
matter, it's a "my livelihood DEPENDS on being paid for the work I do"
matter. We've taken the risk to drop stable work as employees for
commercial firms and instead dedicate our time to making QGIS better.

So let's be cautious in these discussions. Please don't disparage or
put down commercially backed work. Embrace the changing nature of the
project and the benefits it's given to all, and help to guide the
project to ensure that both commercial backed work AND community can
co-exist together.

Nyall

>
> It is important to have a good separation between 'community'-stuff, and
> work that is done because users/companies ask for it. I think the
> crowdfunding campaigns are a good thing: if users or important group of
> users want something, dev's can offer it and it can be 'bought'.
> But if a campaign fails: is it still worth the money?
>
> I'm also aware that we are a heterogeneous community, so my view could
> be rather extreme/idealistic compared to others. But I think one of the
> strength's of QGIS is/was the community, we should foster it; we should
> take care that we are not starting to act like a money-run business.
> People are free to start QGIS-based-business's, but please do not use
> the community for it.
>
> Regards,
>
> Richard Duivenvoorde
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

ginetto
In reply to this post by Nyall Dawson
Sorry Nyall and all, I hadn't intention to give a negative impression of osx users, wasn't my intention... I focused only the fact that these users didn't invested in packaging for osx platform. There could be many reasons for this, not so good marketing of the fundraising? not a US company asking for money (assuming most of them are US based)? better a second round? no idea.

 I accept your suggestion to avoid to talk about Apple, I agree, better focus on qgis users.

Luigi Pirelli

**************************************************************************************************
* LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/luigipirelli
* Stackexchange: http://gis.stackexchange.com/users/19667/luigi-pirelli
* GitHub: https://github.com/luipir
* Mastering QGIS 2nd Edition:
* https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/mastering-qgis-second-edition
* Hire me: http://goo.gl/BYRQKg
**************************************************************************************************


On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 at 00:30, Nyall Dawson <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 at 02:09, Luigi Pirelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I'm not in general in favor of fees on a free (as freedom) project, but in win or linux env, we do not have to pay Apple to sign the application of buy a dedicated hardware to perform CI! (revolutionary tax)
> I'm in favor of a fee considering the fact that OSX (not mac) users didn't want to crowdfund the packaging of support OSX costs for CI (mostly US market). In Win env (now) there is a good dev community that can compile and help build documentation and debug. The only effort on OSX package is lutra's contribution (AFAIK) => there is no a fair balance!
> IMHO spend project funds to a packaging process that nor their user want to support is like continuing to give support to QGIS package for Win XP that is no supported nor by M$.
>
> More, with Apple moving more to an entertainment company we should consider it carefully... IMHO project funds for a packaging that are strictly dependent to commercial decisions is too risky! (remember all harware lost changing apple powerPC to intel processors 10 years ago).

Can I respectful ask that we leave ALL consideration of Apple as a
company out of these discussions? I don't think they are relevant in
any way for our end users, or their experience and utility of QGIS.

This is obviously a tricky discussion, but this is a public forum and
we should avoid all negative talk about MacOS, Apple, and especially
the users of this platform. We have (and always will have) users on
MacOS, and we should keep the discussion focused entirely on how we as
a project can best serve these valued users, and the
technical/financial approach needed to give them a good QGIS
experience.

Nyall


>
> my2c
>
> Luigi Pirelli
>
> **************************************************************************************************
> * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/luigipirelli
> * Stackexchange: http://gis.stackexchange.com/users/19667/luigi-pirelli
> * GitHub: https://github.com/luipir
> * Mastering QGIS 2nd Edition:
> * https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/mastering-qgis-second-edition
> * Hire me: http://goo.gl/BYRQKg
> **************************************************************************************************
>
>
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 at 16:36, Tim Sutton <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> On 26 Mar 2019, at 14:39, Alessandro Pasotti <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Ok I know this may sound heretic (please don't send me to the stake or my kids will starve), but did you consider selling the Mac packages for a small fee?
>>
>> I mean it's absolutely fair that you require a compensation for all you hard work on the Mac stuff, you well deserve it, but I'm not sure this should be on the general QGIS.org budget.
>>
>> The rationale is that the we all know the reasons why developing on Mac is so expensive (well, Mac is so expensive in general) and I think that Mac users should pay for the most of it, not all the users.
>>
>>
>> As a totally biased MacOS user I’m -1 for this. I don’t think supporting packages on Windows or Linux is really any cheaper, just that we had a willing volunteer (Jürgen and others for other Linux derivatives) who contributed a lot of effort for free. I would really not like to see that we single out one platform and start charging for packages it.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Tim
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Tim Sutton
>> [hidden email]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qgis-psc mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc

_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

Nyall Dawson
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 at 10:35, Luigi Pirelli <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Sorry Nyall and all, I hadn't intention to give a negative impression of osx users, wasn't my intention... I focused only the fact that these users didn't invested in packaging for osx platform. There could be many reasons for this, not so good marketing of the fundraising? not a US company asking for money (assuming most of them are US based)? better a second round? no idea.

No worries - my comment wasn't directed to you, it was a general
comment based on my experience when this topic has been discussed in
the past.

Nyall

>> >
>> > **************************************************************************************************
>> > * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/luigipirelli
>> > * Stackexchange: http://gis.stackexchange.com/users/19667/luigi-pirelli
>> > * GitHub: https://github.com/luipir
>> > * Mastering QGIS 2nd Edition:
>> > * https://www.packtpub.com/big-data-and-business-intelligence/mastering-qgis-second-edition
>> > * Hire me: http://goo.gl/BYRQKg
>> > **************************************************************************************************
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 at 16:36, Tim Sutton <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi
>> >>
>> >> On 26 Mar 2019, at 14:39, Alessandro Pasotti <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Ok I know this may sound heretic (please don't send me to the stake or my kids will starve), but did you consider selling the Mac packages for a small fee?
>> >>
>> >> I mean it's absolutely fair that you require a compensation for all you hard work on the Mac stuff, you well deserve it, but I'm not sure this should be on the general QGIS.org budget.
>> >>
>> >> The rationale is that the we all know the reasons why developing on Mac is so expensive (well, Mac is so expensive in general) and I think that Mac users should pay for the most of it, not all the users.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> As a totally biased MacOS user I’m -1 for this. I don’t think supporting packages on Windows or Linux is really any cheaper, just that we had a willing volunteer (Jürgen and others for other Linux derivatives) who contributed a lot of effort for free. I would really not like to see that we single out one platform and start charging for packages it.
>> >>
>> >> Regards
>> >>
>> >> Tim
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ---
>> >>
>> >> Tim Sutton
>> >> [hidden email]
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Qgis-psc mailing list
>> >> [hidden email]
>> >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Qgis-psc mailing list
>> > [hidden email]
>> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

Saber Razmjooei
In reply to this post by Nyall Dawson
Hi all,

Many thanks for your suggestions and feedback.

To make a couple of things clear:

1- Packaging is not an exciting feature, so crowd-funding will not result in many responses.
2- Neither Peter nor Denis are short of fee-earning work. So, the aim of the QEP is to help with bringing macOS packaging in par with other OSes from developers and users point of view.
3- [hidden email]  I don't want to disclose the name of the organisation who funded the initial work. But the idea was that they would consider supporting QGIS directly, once they have better signed packages for their. There was a discussion in Zanzibar with Andreas about possible funding as well. 

Kind regards
Saber

On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 at 05:46, Richard 🌍 Duivenvoorde <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 27/03/2019 00.45, Nyall Dawson wrote:
> The trick is balancing being a professional, finance driven project
> whilst still encouraging donations of code and new community members.
> If we discourage commercial investment and the sponsored work of
> Lutra, North Road, OpenGIS, Oslandia, 3liz, camptocamp, Sourcepole,
> iMhere Asia, etc then we won't have anywhere near the activity we see
> today. For many of us it's no longer a "partly to get a living"
> matter, it's a "my livelihood DEPENDS on being paid for the work I do"
> matter. We've taken the risk to drop stable work as employees for
> commercial firms and instead dedicate our time to making QGIS better.
>
> So let's be cautious in these discussions. Please don't disparage or
> put down commercially backed work. Embrace the changing nature of the
> project and the benefits it's given to all, and help to guide the
> project to ensure that both commercial backed work AND community can
> co-exist together.

Ok, I'll try to be more cautious, I'm not putting down commercial work!

I've no problem with commercial interest, I do have myself too partly. I
hoped that pointing to the Crowdfunding efforts that I'm ok if companies
keep up their own pants. But I do have problems if certain commercial
interests eat 20% of community interest. Then there is an imbalance.
If I look at both the dev and the user 'market', giving/asking 20% of a
yearly budget to a maybe 5 percent market share is not proportional.
Before starting to point to the other OS with a small user market share:
at least they offer (looking at the dev meetings or commumity
discussions on the list) a large part of dev's AND community discussions.

We have to manage this balance carefully, I do not have a good plan for
it. But looking at other projects: Postgres? Debian? Apache? Kernel?
should help. But it is HARD: I've seen OSM point to us after Anita's talk.

@saber: who paid for the effort till oct 2019? Apparently if was more
expensive then they thought? Can they be asked to sponsor the rest?

As a personal note about passing this point 3 years ago: I'm aware of
that and it affects my 'fun' in the project. It's hard to give back to a
project for free if others try to get a living from the same.
So I hereby give up my PSC position to somebody who can handle this
tension better.

Regards,

R


--
Saber Razmjooei
www.lutraconsulting.co.uk
+44 (0)7568 129733

_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

Peter Petrik

Dear PSC,


I have never had an idea to sell QGIS Mac Packages commercially, since I believe the QGIS should be easy and free to install on every platform. The packages Lutra created are based on many hours of work on QGIS, homebrew, homebrew-osgeo, etc. We took the effort to improve Mac packages because we felt it is a request from the user community. Smaller part of the work was funded by crowdfunding and by our client, but I have contributed weeks of work outside the scope of funded work. I will definitely continue to contribute to QGIS project and/or packaging  in unpaid time, but clearly we would probably not have a full free month to do packaging and I wanted to put it clear that without any decision from PSC our small Mac packaging exercise may be left unmaintained in ½ year time.


I have also started this thread to clearly state where we are now, what we have and what work should be taken to have community-driver packaging process. I believe that packaging should be open and community driven, so everyone can contribute. This is clearly not the case for many platforms. It does not mean we need to do it in one massive project or that it has to be fully paid. I understand that QGIS.org is not willing to fund such huge project directly, but we asked for decisions.. So please, would it be possible to clearly state the opinion of PSC about the topic, so the community know what is the resolution?


I see multiple options and there are definitely many others:

  1. Keep the current approach with volunteers to drive the packaging process. No funding from QGIS.org.

  2. Budget for X$/year for packaging for each platform. This way we can slowly over the years improve packaging and implement proposed QEP. The question is how the money will be allocated to developers. Maybe have voted maintainer for the package+platform for a year?

  3. Try to do QGIS driven crowd/business funding of this motion to get some initial funds for kick-off of the project

  4. Encourage developers to apply for QGIS grants for such infrastructure tasks.


If you feel that it may help, I am happy to participate in the meeting and answer the questions. But from my point of view, we need a clear vision from the PSC.


Kind regards,

Peter



On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 7:05 AM Saber Razmjooei <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

Many thanks for your suggestions and feedback.

To make a couple of things clear:

1- Packaging is not an exciting feature, so crowd-funding will not result in many responses.
2- Neither Peter nor Denis are short of fee-earning work. So, the aim of the QEP is to help with bringing macOS packaging in par with other OSes from developers and users point of view.
3- [hidden email]  I don't want to disclose the name of the organisation who funded the initial work. But the idea was that they would consider supporting QGIS directly, once they have better signed packages for their. There was a discussion in Zanzibar with Andreas about possible funding as well. 

Kind regards
Saber

On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 at 05:46, Richard 🌍 Duivenvoorde <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 27/03/2019 00.45, Nyall Dawson wrote:
> The trick is balancing being a professional, finance driven project
> whilst still encouraging donations of code and new community members.
> If we discourage commercial investment and the sponsored work of
> Lutra, North Road, OpenGIS, Oslandia, 3liz, camptocamp, Sourcepole,
> iMhere Asia, etc then we won't have anywhere near the activity we see
> today. For many of us it's no longer a "partly to get a living"
> matter, it's a "my livelihood DEPENDS on being paid for the work I do"
> matter. We've taken the risk to drop stable work as employees for
> commercial firms and instead dedicate our time to making QGIS better.
>
> So let's be cautious in these discussions. Please don't disparage or
> put down commercially backed work. Embrace the changing nature of the
> project and the benefits it's given to all, and help to guide the
> project to ensure that both commercial backed work AND community can
> co-exist together.

Ok, I'll try to be more cautious, I'm not putting down commercial work!

I've no problem with commercial interest, I do have myself too partly. I
hoped that pointing to the Crowdfunding efforts that I'm ok if companies
keep up their own pants. But I do have problems if certain commercial
interests eat 20% of community interest. Then there is an imbalance.
If I look at both the dev and the user 'market', giving/asking 20% of a
yearly budget to a maybe 5 percent market share is not proportional.
Before starting to point to the other OS with a small user market share:
at least they offer (looking at the dev meetings or commumity
discussions on the list) a large part of dev's AND community discussions.

We have to manage this balance carefully, I do not have a good plan for
it. But looking at other projects: Postgres? Debian? Apache? Kernel?
should help. But it is HARD: I've seen OSM point to us after Anita's talk.

@saber: who paid for the effort till oct 2019? Apparently if was more
expensive then they thought? Can they be asked to sponsor the rest?

As a personal note about passing this point 3 years ago: I'm aware of
that and it affects my 'fun' in the project. It's hard to give back to a
project for free if others try to get a living from the same.
So I hereby give up my PSC position to somebody who can handle this
tension better.

Regards,

R


--
Saber Razmjooei
www.lutraconsulting.co.uk
+44 (0)7568 129733
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc

_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

Richard Duivenvoorde
In reply to this post by Nyall Dawson
[sorry resending to list, as I used the wrong email, my msg was bounced,
and only received by Saber]

On 27/03/2019 00.45, Nyall Dawson wrote:

> The trick is balancing being a professional, finance driven project
> whilst still encouraging donations of code and new community members.
> If we discourage commercial investment and the sponsored work of
> Lutra, North Road, OpenGIS, Oslandia, 3liz, camptocamp, Sourcepole,
> iMhere Asia, etc then we won't have anywhere near the activity we see
> today. For many of us it's no longer a "partly to get a living"
> matter, it's a "my livelihood DEPENDS on being paid for the work I do"
> matter. We've taken the risk to drop stable work as employees for
> commercial firms and instead dedicate our time to making QGIS better.
>
> So let's be cautious in these discussions. Please don't disparage or
> put down commercially backed work. Embrace the changing nature of the
> project and the benefits it's given to all, and help to guide the
> project to ensure that both commercial backed work AND community can
> co-exist together.

Ok, I'll try to be more cautious, I'm not putting down commercial work!

I've no problem with commercial interest, I do have myself too partly. I
hoped that pointing to the Crowdfunding efforts that I'm ok if companies
keep up their own pants. But I do have problems if certain commercial
interests eat 20% of community interest. Then there is an imbalance.
If I look at both the dev and the user 'market', giving/asking 20% of a
yearly budget to a maybe 5 percent market share is not proportional.
Before starting to point to the other OS with a small user market share:
at least they offer (looking at the dev meetings or commumity
discussions on the list) a large part of dev's AND community discussions.

We have to manage this balance carefully, I do not have a good plan for
it. But looking at other projects: Postgres? Debian? Apache? Kernel?
should help. But it is HARD: I've seen OSM point to us after Anita's talk.

@saber: who paid for the effort till oct 2019? Apparently if was more
expensive then they thought? Can they be asked to sponsor the rest?

As a personal note about passing this point 3 years ago: I'm aware of
that and it affects my 'fun' in the project. It's hard to give back to a
project for free if others try to get a living from the same.
So I hereby give up my PSC position to somebody who can handle this
tension better.

Regards,

R

_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

pcav
In reply to this post by Peter Petrik
Hi Peter,

On 27/03/19 08:43, Peter Petrik wrote:

...
> I understand that QGIS.org is not willing
> to fund such huge project directly, but we asked for decisions.. So
> please, would it be possible to clearly state the opinion of PSC about
> the topic, so the community know what is the resolution?

I do not think QGIS.ORG is not willing to do it. What is fair to say is
that this decision is a tricky one, as involves, as we are seeing from
the public discussion, fundamental values of the project in a time of
change. I fully understand your frustration, but please take into
account that most decisions in the PSC and the community are taken by
consent rather that clearcut voting: this takes often longer, but allows
us to keep the community united, which proved a big asset of the project.
Having said that, I agree that time is ripe to go ahead, so let's keep
an open discussion and hopefully we'll reach an agreement during our
next PSC meeting, to which you and other interested parties are invited.
Thanks a lot for your work and your stimulus.

--
Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
QGIS.ORG Chair:
http://planet.qgis.org/planet/user/28/tag/qgis%20board/
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

pcav
In reply to this post by Richard Duivenvoorde
Hi Richard, all,

On 27/03/19 09:14, Richard Duivenvoorde wrote:

> As a personal note about passing this point 3 years ago: I'm aware of
> that and it affects my 'fun' in the project. It's hard to give back to a
> project for free if others try to get a living from the same.
> So I hereby give up my PSC position to somebody who can handle this
> tension better.

IMHO this is exactly what we should avoid as hell, for several good
practical and ideal reasons.
Cheers.
--
Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
QGIS.ORG Chair:
http://planet.qgis.org/planet/user/28/tag/qgis%20board/
_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: QGIS for Mac OS packaging and infrastructure

Jürgen E. Fischer
In reply to this post by Richard Duivenvoorde
Hi Richard,

On Wed, 27. Mar 2019 at 09:14:08 +0100, Richard Duivenvoorde wrote:
> So I hereby give up my PSC position to somebody who can handle this
> tension better.

Oh well - please reconsider.

I've shot myself in the left foot with merging the debian changes last minute -
and grass supplied the the ammo to shoot the other.  I need to clean up that
mess first and therefore don't currently have time to defend our position.

I usually didn't have to say much, because you already did - and we're on the
same page.  Please don't give up.


Jürgen

--
Jürgen E. Fischer           norBIT GmbH             Tel. +49-4931-918175-31
Dipl.-Inf. (FH)             Rheinstraße 13          Fax. +49-4931-918175-50
Software Engineer           D-26506 Norden            https://www.norbit.de
QGIS release manager (PSC)  Germany                    IRC: jef on FreeNode

norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH
Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden
GF: Juergen Fischer, Nils Kutscher HR: Amtsgericht Aurich HRB 100827
Datenschutzerklaerung: https://www.norbit.de/83/

_______________________________________________
Qgis-psc mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc

signature.asc (844 bytes) Download Attachment
12