I agree with most of this with some caveats.
Even if a project is open source somebody must be responsible for
ownership of the trademark and copyright (even if it is declared to be
GPL somebody has to be responsible for making that statement). Usually
it is a company or a foundation (which is also a company) and
companies unless they are public are owned by one or few people (look
ate Rails and 37 signals). I have not formed a company yet because I
do not see what difference it makes if I own the trademark of if a
company that I own owns the trademark.
I am interested instead in forming a company or perhaps an association
or a consortium for the purpose of helping users get consulting
contracts, help them with legal matters, and prove long term support
to their clients.
I am not sure what the best way to go about this. I am not sure what
the legal status of such entity should be. One year ago we had long
discussion on this list about creating an Open Source Corporation,
whatever that means. Some have suggested a consortium of small
companies that provide web2py support, some have proposed an
association that provides certification. Nothing happened but I am
still very much interested in this and very much interested in
suggestions.
Massimo
On Mar 4, 4:40 pm, John Heenan <johnmhee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> A brand must outlast individuals. As such Web2py is not a recognised
> and accepted brand.
>
> Web2py is exclusively managed by a single academic who gets uptight
> about issues that are not relevant to Web2py and for which the time he
> puts into Web2py does not provide him with significant financial or
> academic reward.
>
> I expect it will only be a matter of time before Massimo decides he
> has had enough and decides to moves on. I am not complaining. I am
> only stating what I expect. Will web2py will continue to survive?
> Hardly.
>
> From an enterprise perspective having a project largely tied to a
> single person is never good. For example I have seen an earnings
> forecast from a multi billion dollar corporation pushing new
> technologies stating a risk for prospectors is whether key personnel
> continue to stay with the company or not.
>
> I and many others do not care what the real motivations for web2py
> are. Frankly they are irrelevant. The fact that Massimo has chosen in
> his reply below to concentrate on a narrow and irrelevant aspect of
> web2py speaks volumes. That irrelevant aspect is the failure of web2py
> to be accepted in the desired manner at PyCon. PyCon itself is
> irrelevant and unimportant to the vast majority of us.
>
> John Heenan
>
> On Mar 4, 1:02 pm, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 3, 7:23 pm, John Heenan <johnmhee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 4, 2:17 am, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
>
> > > > Some of the answers are funny. Mostly they are consistent with one
> > > > exception.
> > > > Perhaps a web2py hat is better than a t-shirt. I lost mine last
> > > > summer. :-(
>
> > > Rather flippant given that someone has gone to some effort to set up a
> > > survey to help out Web2py and that the survey responses were careful.
>
> > Perhaps my comment did not come out right. This was a good idea. When
> > I said some some of the answers are "funny" I meant it in a positive
> > sense. Perhaps I did not translated the concept I have in my mind
> > ("simpatiche" in Italian) in the proper english.
>
> > > As I see it the real goal of Web2py is to become more popular than
> > > Django. I do not see this as healthy.
>
> > I do not think this is the goal. I think the future of python
> > frameworks is correlated, not anti-correlated.
>
> > > Like it or not, for whatever reasons the Python community is
> > > interested in Django and not in Web2py, as evidenced through
> > > democratic votes of PyCon participants about what participants want to
> > > attend presentations about.
>
> > I was part of the process so I have something to add about this. For
> > three years there has been no talk and no tutorials about web2py,
> > although for three years I have submitted proposals. I was on a panel
> > discussion at PyCon 2009 because Guido stepped in and told them
> > excluding web2py was unfair. I was invited to a panel discussion at
> > PyCon 2010 but I did not go because 5 minutes of air time are not
> > worth the costs.
> > It is not the participants making the choice but a small set of
> > organizers. The decision process by the organizers is indeed
> > democratic (one person one vote) and I was one of them, but the rules
> > are debatable because the goal is unclear. One problem is that
> > basically few people participate to all rounds of discussions and in
> > practice it takes only one or two people to essentially veto a talk.
> > Some people when confronted with the choice tend to give a preference
> > to talks that they perceive to be more popular (for example Django vs
> > TG or web.py or web2py) and to "good speakers" defined as those who
> > have already presented at PyCon before. I have argued that the goal of
> > PyCon should be to broaden the audience (identify medium/large sub-
> > communities and give them representation) as opposed to consolidate
> > existing audience by giving a majority premium to largest communities
> > (such as ~24 hours of Django tutorials/talks and almost nothing to
> > other web frameworks). Of course the Django tutorials were the most
> > popular since by filtering out smaller communities the Django users
> > were the largest community represented at PyCon. The result is that
> > almost nobody from our list of 1600 people attended PyCon 2010. This
> > is not a problem for us as much as it is a problem for PyCon and the
> > Python community in general.
>
> > Although I have published some technical comparisons between web2py
> > and Django (as well as between web2py and other web frameworks) you
> > will not find any post from me or other members less than deferential
> > towards Django. Although, unfortunately, the opposite is not true,
> > negative remarks tend to come from the low end of the food chain. In
> > fact top Django developers and contributors are nice, intelligent and
> > friendly people.
>
> > Moreover I am not convinced at all that the Django community is
> > particularly hostile to web2py. It is just very large so it is more
> > likely that some particularly vocal people belong to it. The people
> > who have been most annoying online (and I know who they are) are not
> > Django cheerleaders either.
>
> > Some people have been offended by a few comments of mine like "[that
> > piece of software] is horrible" or "building an ORM is not rocket
> > science". In there first case the comment just did not come out right
> > and I apologized. In the second case I stand by what I said.
>
> > I personally care more about design and integrity of the framework
> > than its popularity.
>
> > Massimo
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"web2py-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to web...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
web2py+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en.
