Hi all.
At GFOSS.it, we just decided to increase the donations we receive on
behalf of projects that adhered to the microdonation initiative
(currently GRASS and QGIS), by adding one euro from our budget to every
euro donated. I hope this will be appreciated.
So now your donations have now more effect for the well being of the
projects. Of course, other projects are welcome to join in.
All the best.
--
Paolo Cavallini: http://www.faunalia.it/pc
That is very generous of GFOSS.it, and it will make a big difference for both of these projects.
Thanks,
John
On Jul 3, 2009, at 2:59 AM, Paolo Cavallini wrote:
Hi all.
At GFOSS.it, we just decided to increase the donations we receive on
behalf of projects that adhered to the microdonation initiative
(currently GRASS and QGIS), by adding one euro from our budget to every
euro donated. I hope this will be appreciated.
So now your donations have now more effect for the well being of the
projects. Of course, other projects are welcome to join in.
All the best.
--
Paolo Cavallini: http://www.faunalia.it/pc
_______________________________________________
Qgis-user mailing list
Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
Thanks a lot to GFOSS.it! And to the folks managing the donations.
To remember:
http://www.qgis.org/sponsorship.html
http://grass.osgeo.org/donation.php
Also small donations are welcome.
Best
Markus
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Paolo Cavallini<cavallini@faunalia.it> wrote:
Hi all.
At GFOSS.it, we just decided to increase the donations we receive on
behalf of projects that adhered to the microdonation initiative
(currently GRASS and QGIS), by adding one euro from our budget to every
euro donated. I hope this will be appreciated.
So now your donations have now more effect for the well being of the
projects. Of course, other projects are welcome to join in.
All the best.
--
Paolo Cavallini: http://www.faunalia.it/pc
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Hi all,
I would like to discuss the sponsoring issue a little bit. For GIS managers that are not in direct charge of their budgets but need to discuss/approve their budget with their bosses/supervisors, I can say that:
* It is relatively easy to raise money for development work of concrete features that are to be implemented - bosses usually see a direct value out of this - and they are already used to pay non-open-source corporations for their specific development efforts anyway
* it is harder to raise money for bug-fixing - managers are often used to pay subscription fees or support contracts to commercial vendors, but usually aren't used to paying money to fix bugs
* it is very hard to justify donations - as bosses usually don't understand the open-source model fully - and often don't see their responsibilities as a user of an open-source project
I am just trying to help you guys to understand how government agencies or companies often work (exceptions are always possible). It is important to educate managers regarding the open-source development model. They are just not used to it and at the first glimpse they can find it strange - even if it is to their advantage.
One may discuss if QGIS/GRASS (or other projects) could offer yearly support contracts. It may help to raise additional money in some cases. It is important to distinguish such contracts from their fully commercial counterparts. Customers shouldn't be forced into paying those fees/contracts - but they may fell better with paying them. Probably, such contracts, would have to be done by individual companies - or could the steering board coordinate such activities?
Many managers in government agencies don't want to be held responsible in case things go wrong - and in case of using open-source software they are fully responsible about their decisions, whereas with commercial software they can always blame their commercial vendor (even if the contracts are always in favor of the software vendor and includes very limited liability of the vendor). At least in Switzerland I know that many GIS managers are thinking this way. They often want to at least share their responsibility with an external company.
Just my two cents,
Andreas
Markus Neteler wrote:
Thanks a lot to GFOSS.it! And to the folks managing the donations.
To remember:
http://www.qgis.org/sponsorship.html
http://grass.osgeo.org/donation.phpAlso small donations are welcome.
Best
MarkusOn Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Paolo Cavallini<cavallini@faunalia.it> wrote:
Hi all.
At GFOSS.it, we just decided to increase the donations we receive on
behalf of projects that adhered to the microdonation initiative
(currently GRASS and QGIS), by adding one euro from our budget to every
euro donated. I hope this will be appreciated.
So now your donations have now more effect for the well being of the
projects. Of course, other projects are welcome to join in.
All the best.
--
Paolo Cavallini: http://www.faunalia.it/pc
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_______________________________________________
Qgis-user mailing list
Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
Thank you Andreas.
Andreas Neumann ha scritto:
I am just trying to help you guys to understand how government agencies
or companies often work (exceptions are always possible). It is
important to educate managers regarding the open-source development
model. They are just not used to it and at the first glimpse they can
find it strange - even if it is to their advantage.
Yes, we are fully aware of this. That's why we start raising awareness
on these themes - a (modest) cultural change will do much to the future
of QGIS.
One may discuss if QGIS/GRASS (or other projects) could offer yearly
support contracts. It may help to raise additional money in some cases.
It is important to distinguish such contracts from their fully
commercial counterparts. Customers shouldn't be forced into paying those
fees/contracts - but they may fell better with paying them. Probably,
such contracts, would have to be done by individual companies - or could
the steering board coordinate such activities?
IMHO mixing core development with paid support is not very good. Several
companies offer commercial, professional support on QGIS development,
and they invest in core QGIS development, see
http://qgis.org/en/commercial-support.html so if someone wants to play
safe, they have an easy and efficient way.
Many managers in government agencies don't want to be held responsible
in case things go wrong - and in case of using open-source software they
are fully responsible about their decisions, whereas with commercial
software they can always blame their commercial vendor (even if the
contracts are always in favor of the software vendor and includes very
limited liability of the vendor). At least in Switzerland I know that
many GIS managers are thinking this way. They often want to at least
share their responsibility with an external company.
So what I would tell them is: go ahead and contract one of the core
developers, or one of the companies listed in
http://qgis.org/en/commercial-support.html and
http://grass.osgeo.org/community/commercial.php
Several companies and agencies already do it.
All the best.
--
Paolo Cavallini: http://www.faunalia.it/pc