MapServer Foundation - Picking up the pieces
2005-11-29 11:19 | Permanent Link | Locative, Open SourceThis is a story that requires a bit of preparation on the part of readers who may not be directly involved in the MapServer community. You should read the announcement about the new MapServer Foundation, and you should read Ed McNierney's excellent response.
The short version (and you do yourself a disservice if you did not read those two items) is that some principals of the open source MapServer project have been working with Autodesk (list of names is here ) to broker a deal whereby Autodesk released a major software package they had under development as open source software while at the same time helping to underwrite the formation of the MapServer Foundation.
There was an initial flurry of "oh wow!" and "that's interesting" messages followed by some more cautious voices and finally the unleashing of a bit of a backlash. That backlash is what Ed McNierney captured so well in his message.
The initiative to form the foundation and to donate software to the foundation has the potential to go very, very wrong. Or it can be turned into something very, very good.
How to make it good:
- Apologize to the community for doing a poor job of being inclusive. As Ed points out, the formation of the Foundation was done in secret. There were even non-disclosure forms. That may be how you launch a product, but it's not how you win the hearts and minds of the open source community. It could have been handled better, but it was not. Don't pretend that it was the only way to handle things. Show the community that you learned something.
- Fix the naming muddle. The original open source project was called "MapServer". It's a brand. It may be a slightly confusing brand but it's what people have been working with for a long time. The Foundation principals want to change the name to "MapServer Cheetah". And they want to name the software donated by Autodesk "MapServer Enterprise". This doesn't just sow confusion. It says that the principals decided that Autodesk's contribution was "better" in some dimension since they picked a name that was more likely to resonate with the "suits". Moreover, "Enterprise" might be a more polished product, but from what I have seen, it's not more capable. It is certainly not more standards compliant. I think the Autodesk contribution should be given a completely different name, and MapServer Cheetah should stay MapServer.
- Listen. It's not clear to me that Autodesk was sufficiently schooled in the niceties of open source. Whether or not the other principals are, the outcome shows that the team as a whole was not able to smoothly roll out this announcement. How well does Autodesk understand open source? How well do they understand the community? They were at OSG '05 but that's not enough. In fact, at least one prominent member of the geo open source community stated that he was scared at the prospect of Autodesk entering the community. What Autodesk and the rest of the principals need to do now is listen. Openly. They have to let people know they are listening, and listening well. So far, there has been a lot of traffic on the umn_mapserver-users mailing list and the #mapserver IRC. The responses from the principals have been largely defensive. You're not listening if you're defensive.
- Proceed carefully. The MapServer Foundation actually does not exist yet. There is no legal entity called the MapServer Foundation. This is the principals' big chance to show the community that they want to do things right.
The responsibility does not lie solely with the principals of the foundation. It rests with all of us. We have to be constructive. And we have to show some backbone. We have to say that we want a positive outcome, that we're willing to help, and that we don't wish to compromise the long term good of the community for a short term gain by any specific member of the community.
The outcome can be very, very good.
