[Gvsig_english] Query on why gvSIG CE came about

[Wolfgang Qual]

Dear all,

I have the feeling that this discussion is not really objective. Both sides
blame each other and
even the discussion is "forked". I think, it would be better to use only one
list for this discussion. 
(see
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=42328.99650.qm%40web27906.mail.ukl.yahoo.com&forum_name=gvsigce-community):

Benjamin wrote at the ce-users list:
"Unfortunately, many of the improvements in gvSIG OADE 2010 never
were merged back in. Most essentially, most of the hard work on
the GUI and menu structure was rejected. One of the aims of 
gvSIG CE is to preserve these, and merge with the changes for
gvSIG 1.11/1.12.

The procedure for getting external contributions into CIT's
gvSIG code base is painfully time-consuming. I have found
it impossible to comply with their procedure given my limited
resources. It is what drove me away from their project in the end.
I want to program and create, not follow someone else's procedures.
Other people here have their own reasons."

Best,
Wolfgang


> Hi Simon,
>
> gvSIG is a place where everyone can contribute as you can state by your
> own history. Not just patches but also documentation, translations, case
> studies, artwork and so on. That's happening everyday, no matter what
> others say.

>
> On the development side where are continuously improving our workflows,
> the balance between being agile or quick and being very conscious about
> stability, GUI consistency and so on is not easy. Our Technical Steering
> Committee (which mailing list is open to everyone) are finishing a
> document about code contributions workflows and roles.
>
> So my first point is about to confirm that the whole gvSIG team is
> focused on the community, all the time, since the beginning of the
> project. Of course everything can be improved, but stating elsewhere
> that gvSIG team doesn't collaborate is a non-sense.
>
> If a group of users or developers want to follow another path we cannot
> do anything against that, apart to try to understand the real reasons of
> their fork. I personally did that on the CE list asking openly what the
> gvSIG team can do to reorient the CE group to other kind of activity
> instead a fork and I didn't get any answer. On the same way that group
> didn't discussed here about their intentions or concerns before starting
> their initiative. They just decided by themselves that the idea was ok
> and now they say they are more open oriented than the gvSIG team. Cool.
>
> Even the name, in my opinion is perverse. They are the Community Edition
> and we are... what?? They insist on the "CIT gvSIG" name that is also
> wrong. gvSIG is a project born at CIT, and everyone should be proud of
> CIT encouraging gvSIG but gvSIG is a community project, supported by the
> gvSIG Association and thousands of users, developers, companies,
> universities and public administrations all around the world.
>
> Best
>
> --
> Jorge Gaspar Sanz Salinas
> gvSIG Team at Prodevelop
> Technical Collaborations Manager
> http://www.gvsig.org
> http://www.gvsig.com
> _______________________________________________
> Gvsig_internacional mailing list
> Gvsig_internacional at listserv.gva.es
> http://listserv.gva.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gvsig_internacional
>

_______________________________________________
Gvsig_internacional mailing list
Gvsig_internacional at listserv.gva.es
http://listserv.gva.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gvsig_internacional



--
View this message in context: http://osgeo-org.1803224.n2.nabble.com/Query-on-why-gvSIG-CE-came-about-tp6519610p6524905.html
Sent from the gvSIG users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.