Robert Szczepanek initiated a new public mailing list that has just been added to the stack at the OSGeo mailing lists server – graphics@lists.osgeo.org:
Let’s create common, resuable graphical elements for many OSGeo projects.
We focus our discussion on design aspects of graphics – symbols, icons and signs.
Robert has been working on graphics and icons for GIS for long time.
I do not advocate anything or anyone. All right, may be I do advocate but only a few small tiny things like C++ programming language, generic programming and high quality of software code and design and my dog, of course. However, I let myself to go down in the discussion about advantages and disadvantages of Open Source GIS on OGC forum at LinkedIn and somewhat at OSGeo mailing list too.
A human nature pisses me off, sometimes. (I am a human being, in case of doubt.) The world is bloody relative but we love to sling absolutes around. Yeah, we love this game! We are not good in learning from mistakes, anyway. Thus, the only achievement of attempting to apply a patch to someone’s buggy ignorance is a waste of time and may be a bit of training in fast typing or boxing ;-)
Paul is right recommending don’t feed the troll!. But, what has been learned is going to be lost, naturally.
I think, I need it too.
The singular processing is dead. Long live the multiprocessing.
I can not even imagine effectiveness of exploitation of such a power by issuing little gdalwarp command. GDAL, libLAS, are we ready to squeeze out this CUDA’ny juice?
Co za CUDA! Yes, indeed!
I had to apply GPL licensing to a source code I was writing. I hit on gnu.org and started reading the HOWTO…bla bla bla…
either version 3 of the License, or (at your option) any later version
IANAL, concerns and confusions started to spin my head around. Let’s ask the only and the bloody search engine used by 99.999% of the world human population. As usually Linus Torvalds succours:
The fact is, anybody who cares about the copyright license he uses on software (and I sure do care!) should *never* give a blank check to somebody else that they don’t trust to change that license for them.
Sound very reasonable.
- ..or you trust the FSF implicitly.
In this case, you’re not an independent entity, you’re just a lackey
of the FSF when it comes to the license.
Sounds disturbing!
The FSF “generously and helpfully” suggests the most idiotic and the least advantageous option assuming that everybody trusts FSF. It’s just not right!
Hmm, paraphrasing Linus Torvalds’ famous statement: if your GPL-ed code includes or any later version in license notice, you shouldn’t be here. You should be in some mental institution, somewhere else.
Having problems with understanding semantic of EMPTY geometry?
Paul Ramsey has started wrapping up a proper article on PostGIS Wiki explaining most of the issues related to understanding of emptiness of geometries bothering the community of PostGIS users, and OGC standards users in general.
Check it like it’s hot DevWikiEmptyGeometry. Thanks Paul!