devicemap-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Werner Keil <werner.k...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: DeviceMap article on Informatik-Aktuell (DE)
Date Tue, 21 Apr 2015 13:09:48 GMT
Hi,

Thanks for the feedback. When fellow OpenDDR committers (and at least 2 of
them DeviceMap PMC emeritus members) discussed the donation process, that's
how they told me. So I did not make it up, and almost every publication or
slides refer to the initial contribution. Last year's JavaLand article was
identical here.
Please see the SlideShare page "What was Contributed?" as I can't access
SlideShare here for the official ApacheCon version. It is phrased a bit
differently, but on e.g. German slide decks you'd find it in a similar way.
Happy to rephrase it for a new edition of slides and/or articles when next
asked to write about DeviceMap.

Good you mention the donation though, I'll come to that in the "Ruby"
thread as its author would be very open to donating the ruby client to this
project if it's welcome.

I am not quoting any of the attacks by WURFL guys at the time, but let's
just say it exceeds anything we ever heard, replied or wrote here (anyone
on this list) by far, so I won't bother you with it any more. There is no
such attack in the slides or article, Also every major competing solution
is listed and compared. The only thing that is different with WURFL is it
was taken from the Open Source community.

The dotCMS vendor (who as of now also refers to WURFL btw, but looks like
they consider fair and transparent alternatives like OpenDDR or DeviceMap
just like everyone else;-) states:
More Sites Run on dotCMS than our Three Nearest Competitors Combined* DEMO
<http://dotcms.com/demo>  DOWNLOAD <http://dotcms.com/download>
* Sources: builtwith.com

If you're interested which competitors they refer to, check "builtwith.com",
the statement is the same kind of competitive analysis as what the article
does with all of them. DeviceMap is "more open and transparent" or whatever
you interpret out of it. And unless others make their repository available
under another OSS license, that is the essence of these comparisons.

The last update was directly requested by WURFL. Check their WURL.JS page
if you like, especially the license terms under which it may be used are
clearly outlines. It is for non-profit alone and may not exceed X
detections per day or month.

I seconded your opinion earlier when Reza suggested to put PR material on
the project site. That IMHO the only qualified material would be what was
accepted by the very ASF and presented at ApacheCon Europe last fall or any
future ApacheCon. Not every speaker may do that, some use their company
slides, but both in 2006 and 2014 my slides were always based on the
conference template. Everyone in the team got a chance to see them upfront,
I recall circulating them. Whether there's a formal vote or review in
future cases (devicemap-private seems the appropriate place for that) I am
quite open, a least for ApacheCon presentations. Which at the end of the
day always get reviewed by the program committee, too (and if they don't
like a session they would not accept it in the first place;-)

Werner

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org
> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Werner Keil <werner.keil@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> ...
> >
> http://www.informatik-aktuell.de/entwicklung/programmiersprachen/apache-devicemap-repository-fuer-mobile-geraeteerkennung.html
> ...
>
> thanks for sharing this - my German is somewhat limited but I think I
> got the gist of it, I have two comments:
>
> "Fast zeitgleich mit der Entstehung des OpenDDR-Projekts machte man
> sich in der Apache Foundation ähnliche Gedanken und evaluierte
> verfügbare Open Source-Lösungen. Diese Evaluierung befand OpenDDR als
> das vielversprechendste Projekt und im ersten Halbjahr 2012 wurden
> neben dem W3C konformen Device Repository Java- und .NET-Clients von
> OpenDDR als Initial Contribution zur Verfügung gestellt [3]. "
>
> IIUC this means that the ASF evaluated various open source solutions
> and selected OpenDDR as the basis of DeviceMap.
>
> If yes this is not correct - the ASF has no technical strategy and
> does not select things. It's the initial DeviceMap committers who
> decided to accept the initial OpenDDR code donation.
>
> It's a subtle but important difference - the ASF only exists to
> provide a space for its projects to exist, but does not make any
> technical decisions on behalf of its projects. There's lots of
> misunderstandings in our audience about this, so it's good to help
> make that clear as often as we can.
>
> Apart from that it feels like that article contains a good deal of
> WURFL bashing - let it be clear that Apache DeviceMap does not support
> such things. In this case it's fine as IIUC it's clear that the
> article is your own.
>
> -Bertrand
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message