thanks for this Richard did some interesting research, and has a list of
possible examples of visions for other similar projects.
On 10/20/19 5:55 PM, Anita Graser wrote:
> As discussed on the last PSC meeting, there's interest in asking our
> users for their ideas about a vision and goals for QGIS.ORG
> We need a good but short intro text to provide context for these
> questions. Do you have anything ready / any suggestions?
> Besides these two questions, do you want to also include questions about
> the respondent's background, e.g. private user vs corporate user, dev vs
> power user vs pure end user, level of experience, ...?
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> [hidden email] > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc >
> Thanks Paolo,
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 8:15 AM Paolo Cavallini <[hidden email] > <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
> Hi Anita,
> thanks for this Richard did some interesting research, and has a list of
> possible examples of visions for other similar projects.
> Do you happen to have a link where I can find this information?
It is some quick googling, and what I personally feel should be a FOSS
I tend to have a clear separation between the community/project and
companies trying to make a living from it. The project should be
leading, and not spend direct money on companies for features, but only
for bugfixing, infra and architectural changes, preferably to
individuals. In this way the project is hopefully better suited to
steer/foster the project (only).
Companies make money by investing time/money in the project (because
they live (partly) from it), AND they take money from
user-groups/companies to implement things/fix stuff directly, but
ideally in communication with the project (via QEP?).
I think a foss project should try to spread it's money over as much
dev's as possible (actually to attract as much dev's as possible).
But this is personal. I tend to see Debian as a good example, but do not
like all the rules they have in place... In my ideal world everybody
thinks/feels the same about shared goals and values... but not sure if
that is reasonable.. :-)
my original idea was more about principles than vision and goals.
I still see the DSC as a more concrete, operative, and soud document.
It probably makes sense to merge the two.
In any case, I would avoid all the corporate jargon.
But I think these are two completely different things - one outlines what our usage guidelines are for QGIS and one outlines what the vision and goals of the project are. So definitely don’t merge them, though we could propose them both at the same time….
Hi all, my original idea was more about principles than vision and goals. I still see the DSC as a more concrete, operative, and soud document. It probably makes sense to merge the two. In any case, I would avoid all the corporate jargon. Cheers.