comaps/Governance
21
42
Fork
You've already forked Governance
5

WIP: Rework mission and vision statements #94

Draft
kj7rrv wants to merge 2 commits from kj7rrv/Governance:main into main
pull from: kj7rrv/Governance:main
merge into: comaps:main
comaps:main
comaps:hbond-access
comaps:pastk-AI
comaps:20260116-mission
comaps:ai_usage
comaps:patepelo-spending
comaps:yannikbloscheck-structure
comaps:oleg-rswll-update-contributors-doc
comaps:oleg-rswll-governance-structure
comaps:zyphlar-patch-1
comaps:github_owner
comaps:oleg-rswll-word-update
comaps:oleg-rswll-patch-1
First-time contributor
Copy link

Mission: I added "pedestrians" in place of "hikers" and added "outdoor enthusiasts" at the end (closes #93), and rephrased parts of the statement to sound more natural.

Vision: The original statement was ambiguous as to whether it meant libre or gratis by "free"; this clarifies that and also mentions privacy.

Mission: I added "pedestrians" in place of "hikers" and added "outdoor enthusiasts" at the end (closes #93), and rephrased parts of the statement to sound more natural. Vision: The original statement was ambiguous as to whether it meant libre or gratis by "free"; this clarifies that and also mentions privacy.
I added "pedestrians" in place of "hikers" and added "outdoor enthusiasts" at the end, and rephrased parts of the statement to sound more natural.
The original statement was ambiguous as to whether it meant libre or gratis by "free"; this clarifies that and also mentions privacy.
@ -5,3 +5,3 @@
**Mission** (provisional)
Provide easy navigating offline for drivers, hikers, and cyclists, with privacy-focus and open-source, made by and for the community.
Provide easy offline navigation for drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, and outdoor enthusiasts, with a committment to privacy and open-source licensing, made by and for the community.
Owner
Copy link

Provide easy and reliable navigation for everyone, with a commitment to privacy and free software values, made by and for the community.

WDYT?

I see no point in enumerating various groups of users explicitly. We strive for a generic maps app, so "for everyone" would work?
Well, except special uses like marine or aerial navigation. Maybe we can add "for general use" or "generic"?

It also avoids explicit use of "offline" as per discussion in #70

`Provide easy and reliable navigation for everyone, with a commitment to privacy and free software values, made by and for the community.` WDYT? I see no point in enumerating various groups of users explicitly. We strive for a generic maps app, so "for everyone" would work? Well, except special uses like marine or aerial navigation. Maybe we can add "for general use" or "generic"? It also avoids explicit use of "offline" as per discussion in https://codeberg.org/comaps/Governance/issues/70
Owner
Copy link

You're right. We can ecompass everyone in "people"

You're right. We can ecompass everyone in "people"

The existing 'drivers, hikers and cyclists' is somewhat useful as puts boundaries on the use cases CoMaps covers (currently or wants to cover)?

My shot at merging it: Provide easy and reliable navigation - by foot, bike or car - for everyone, with a commitment to privacy and free software values, made by and for the community. (or something similar, to keep the clarity for which modes are targeted)

The existing 'drivers, hikers and cyclists' is somewhat useful as puts boundaries on the use cases CoMaps covers (currently or wants to cover)? My shot at merging it: `Provide easy and reliable navigation - by foot, bike or car - for everyone, with a commitment to privacy and free software values, made by and for the community.` (or something similar, to keep the clarity for which modes are targeted)
Owner
Copy link

My point is - why limit it to specific modes of transport?
E.g. when we add buses and waterways navigation later - will we have to change the mission? In fact, we want to have PT and water navigation in CoMaps already, so its our mission! :)

The mission statement is not an app's description, not a list of specific features and not a promotional text, its fine to have it quite generic.

My point is - why limit it to specific modes of transport? E.g. when we add buses and waterways navigation later - will we have to change the mission? In fact, we want to have PT and water navigation in CoMaps already, so its our mission! :) The mission statement is not an app's description, not a list of specific features and not a promotional text, its fine to have it quite generic.

Fair enough, if the ambition is to scale out like that we can keep it general!

Fair enough, if the ambition is to scale out like that we can keep it general!
Author
First-time contributor
Copy link

How about this? It sounds like marine navigation is planned to be supported at some point, but aerial navigation is not, so this reflects that ides.

Provide easy and reliable navigation, by land and water for everyone, with a commitment to privacy, free software values, and full offline support, made by and for the community.

How about this? It sounds like marine navigation is planned to be supported at some point, but aerial navigation is not, so this reflects that ides. > Provide easy and reliable navigation, by land and water for everyone, with a commitment to privacy, free software values, and full offline support, made by and for the community.
Owner
Copy link

I'd just drop such details, they're unnecessary IMO.

Or use something like "provide general use maps and navigation for everyone" so that its clear we are not focusing on outer space or geological maps, etc. :)

I'd just drop such details, they're unnecessary IMO. Or use something like "provide general use maps and navigation for everyone" so that its clear we are not focusing on outer space or geological maps, etc. :)
Author
First-time contributor
Copy link

Like this?

Provide easy and reliable general-use maps and navigation for everyone, with a commitment to privacy, free software values, and full offline support, made by and for the community.

Like this? > Provide easy and reliable general-use maps and navigation for everyone, with a commitment to privacy, free software values, and full offline support, made by and for the community.
Owner
Copy link

Yeap by I would drop "and full offline support". IMO its just one way to make the app reliable (available everywhere and independent of internet connection) and privacy-focused (by reducing communication with online services).

Yeap by I would drop "and full offline support". IMO its just one way to make the app reliable (available everywhere and independent of internet connection) and privacy-focused (by reducing communication with online services).
First-time contributor
Copy link

Maybe we can add "for general use" or "generic"?

for some at least "general use" would exclude hikers, for some would exclude also cyclists.

> Maybe we can add "for general use" or "generic"? for some at least "general use" would exclude hikers, for some would exclude also cyclists.
@ -9,3 +9,3 @@
**Vision** (provisional)
A world in which the top choice for navigation software is free and developed through open collaboration.
A world in which the top choice for navigation software respects users' freedom and privacy and is developed through open collaboration.
Owner
Copy link

Why only navigation software? All software!?

Why only navigation software? All software!?
Author
First-time contributor
Copy link

@pastk wrote in #94 (comment):

Why only navigation software? All software!?

Of course, it would be great if all software met that goal, but isn't that out-of-scope for CoMaps?

@pastk wrote in https://codeberg.org/comaps/Governance/pulls/94#issuecomment-5547491: > Why only navigation software? All software!? Of course, it would be great if all software met that goal, but isn't that out-of-scope for CoMaps?
Owner
Copy link

CoMaps scope is in the mission statement, no?

My understanding of the "vision" is that its more broad.

But I'm happy to just go with the mission and drop the vision to avoid confusion and duplication :)

(some people might also add a "purpose" as a third category 🫠 e.g. https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/MISSION.md)

CoMaps scope is in the mission statement, no? My understanding of the "vision" is that its more broad. But I'm happy to just go with the mission and drop the vision to avoid confusion and duplication :) (some people might also add a "purpose" as a third category 🫠 e.g. https://codeberg.org/forgejo/governance/src/branch/main/MISSION.md)
Author
First-time contributor
Copy link

Maybe that would be the best choice; I don't really see any information given in the vision statement that isn't implied by the mission.

Maybe that would be the best choice; I don't really see any information given in the vision statement that isn't implied by the mission.

Mission is what we do or what we offer, which is basically the same as the purpose.

Vision is the goal, the future that we are building. A mission statement without a vision means we just keep doing what we do now, without any particular direction.

Mission is what we do or what we offer, which is basically the same as the purpose. Vision is the goal, the future that we are building. A mission statement without a vision means we just keep doing what we do now, without any particular direction.

Since privacy is already in the mission, it's probably not needed in the vision statement.

Since privacy is already in the mission, it's probably not needed in the vision statement.

The question for visions are:

While doing the mission, what are we trying to accomplish with this project?

  • We want many people to use the app
  • we want community development to be a major way in how software is developed
  • we want...
The question for visions are: While doing the mission, what are we trying to accomplish with this project? - We want many people to use the app - we want community development to be a major way in how software is developed - we want...
Owner
Copy link
  • we want community development to be a major way in how software is developed

Yeap this is my vision and its not limited to navigation software only 😊

> * we want community development to be a major way in how software is developed Yeap this is my vision and its not limited to navigation software only 😊

I think saying "offline" is perhaps a little too specific. That's the method (for the foreseeable future), not the mission.

Also see conversation here for more opinions.

I think saying "offline" is perhaps a little too specific. That's the method (for the foreseeable future), not the mission. Also see conversation [here](https://codeberg.org/comaps/Governance/issues/70) for more opinions.

Provide easy navigating offline, with commitment to privacy, free software values, and open-source, made by and for the community.

We probably don't want to drop "open-source" from the mission, so that at some point in the future someone doesn't try to hide the source code.

`Provide easy navigating offline, with commitment to privacy, free software values, and open-source, made by and for the community.` We probably don't want to drop "open-source" from the mission, so that at some point in the future someone doesn't try to hide the source code.
Owner
Copy link

Usually "open source" is seen as a subset of "free software" (free as in freedom). Or we can use a more comprehensive and less ambiguous term "Free and Open Source Software" to be sure its understood correctly.

Usually "open source" is seen as a subset of "free software" (free as in freedom). Or we can use a more comprehensive and less ambiguous term "Free and Open Source Software" to be sure its understood correctly.

@IXVG47QZ wrote in #94 (comment):

I think saying "offline" is perhaps a little too specific. That's the method (for the foreseeable future), not the mission

I think the "offline" is a big draw for CM as many regions of the world don't have any or not reliable mobile coverage, and most commercial maps get offline-support wrong or it's only an afterthought. In contrast, CM let's me be in the middle of the patagonian steppe and still find my way and even read the Wikipedia blurbs that are on POIs.

We could change it to "offline-first" or "local-first" (to connect to the Local-First Software Movement), but IMHO keeping it one way or another as a clear mission piece would be good, as it highlights clearly what makes CM unique.

@IXVG47QZ wrote in https://codeberg.org/comaps/Governance/pulls/94#issuecomment-5570612: > I think saying "offline" is perhaps a little too specific. That's the method (for the foreseeable future), not the mission I think the "offline" is a big draw for CM as many regions of the world don't have any or not reliable mobile coverage, and most commercial maps get offline-support wrong or it's only an afterthought. In contrast, CM let's me be in the middle of the patagonian steppe and still find my way and even read the Wikipedia blurbs that are on POIs. We could change it to "offline-first" or "local-first" (to connect to the Local-First Software Movement), but IMHO keeping it one way or another as a clear mission piece would be good, as it highlights clearly what makes CM unique.
Owner
Copy link

@gedankenstuecke wrote in #94 (comment):

In contrast, CM let's me be in the middle of the patagonian steppe and still find my way and even read the Wikipedia blurbs that are on POIs.

So the actual mission is to provide maps which are functional everywhere and are not dependent on internet service providers, right?

"Offlline" is the current main method to achieve it. But it could possibly change in 5-10 years (e.g. if there is ubiquitous free satellite internet).

@gedankenstuecke wrote in https://codeberg.org/comaps/Governance/pulls/94#issuecomment-5573480: > In contrast, CM let's me be in the middle of the patagonian steppe and still find my way and even read the Wikipedia blurbs that are on POIs. So the actual mission is to provide maps which are functional everywhere and are not dependent on internet service providers, right? "Offlline" is the current main method to achieve it. But it could possibly change in 5-10 years (e.g. if there is ubiquitous free satellite internet).

Even if there was ubiquitous free satellite internet with a global coverage and that works on all phones that CM supports, it would still be dependent on the satellite internet service providers?

I guess I'm not fully getting the opposition to the word "offline" and might be missing something! To me it's the most accessible/easily understood word to encapsulate your idea of "functional everywhere and without relying on ISPs" and is a positive USP of CM! 🙂

Even if there was ubiquitous free satellite internet with a global coverage and that works on all phones that CM supports, it would still be dependent on the satellite internet service providers? I guess I'm not fully getting the opposition to the word "offline" and might be missing something! To me it's the most accessible/easily understood word to encapsulate your idea of "functional everywhere and without relying on ISPs" and is a positive USP of CM! 🙂

The goal today is offline only, and it seems that all the necessary features a navigation app needs to offer can be done online (including traffic and road closures); so this sounds like a good goal, and it would be good to keep with this path.

But in the future there may be scenarios where secondary functionality that may be really necessary that works only online, and we may not want to completely close the door on that. For example, today we already offer bookmark synchronization to iCloud, which is online, we have comaps.at which opens links to our online service, and we may even want to develop comaps.at to be a full product like https://www.google.com/maps, which would not be offline.

We can make the mission be "offline-first". The potential downside is that this may encourage PRs for creating more online features.

The goal today is offline only, and it seems that all the necessary features a navigation app needs to offer can be done online (including traffic and road closures); so this sounds like a good goal, and it would be good to keep with this path. But in the future there may be scenarios where secondary functionality that may be really necessary that works only online, and we may not want to completely close the door on that. For example, today we already offer bookmark synchronization to iCloud, which is online, we have comaps.at which opens links to our online service, and we may even want to develop comaps.at to be a full product like https://www.google.com/maps, which would not be offline. We can make the mission be "offline-first". The potential downside is that this may encourage PRs for creating more online features.

What about three words instead of one, "online or off"? Because it really doesn't matter, which I think is what the big deal about offline maps is anyway.

But I've said my piece, thank you.

What about three words instead of one, "online or off"? Because it really doesn't matter, which I think is what the big deal about offline maps is anyway. But I've said my piece, thank you.

@oleg-rswll wrote in #94 (comment):

But in the future there may be scenarios where secondary functionality that may be really necessary that works only online, and we may not want to completely close the door on that. For example, today we already offer bookmark synchronization to iCloud, which is online, we have comaps.at which opens links to our online service,

I'm fine with 'offline-first'. 🙂

(And of course even today CoMaps isn't fully offline, beyond the bookmarks, sharing of links, editing OSM points, even downloading the maps needs connectivity! But the 'easy navigating offline' is the bit that's at least historically be one of the big selling points)

@oleg-rswll wrote in https://codeberg.org/comaps/Governance/pulls/94#issuecomment-5585606: > But in the future there may be scenarios where secondary functionality that may be really necessary that works only online, and we may not want to completely close the door on that. For example, today we already offer bookmark synchronization to iCloud, which is online, we have comaps.at which opens links to our online service, I'm fine with 'offline-first'. 🙂 (And of course even today CoMaps isn't fully offline, beyond the bookmarks, sharing of links, editing OSM points, even downloading the maps needs connectivity! But the 'easy __navigating__ offline' is the bit that's at least historically be one of the big selling points)
oleg-rswll changed title from (削除) Rework mission and vision statements (削除ここまで) to WIP: Rework mission and vision statements 2025年06月27日 22:57:55 +02:00
Owner
Copy link

Thanks everyone for ideas!
I've tried to address them in #149

Thanks everyone for ideas! I've tried to address them in https://codeberg.org/comaps/Governance/pulls/149
This pull request has changes conflicting with the target branch.
  • README.md
View command line instructions

Manual merge helper

Use this merge commit message when completing the merge manually.

Checkout

From your project repository, check out a new branch and test the changes.
git fetch -u main:kj7rrv-main
git switch kj7rrv-main
Sign in to join this conversation.
No reviewers
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
7 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
comaps/Governance!94
Reference in a new issue
comaps/Governance
No description provided.
Delete branch "kj7rrv/Governance:main"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?