Hi Juergen, Il 03/02/2018 16:02, Jürgen E. Fischer ha scritto:
> The question is who is the driving force behind the provider plugins. If we > want those algorithms in QGIS, we will probably have to maintain the plugins, > if we don't want them to die. > > Otherwise if we don't care and just want to enable others to have QGIS > intgration, they'll have to adopt the plugins. That might work better if > there > is real interest. But I think they usally prefer their tools to be used in > their own environment and don't care that much about whether it works in QGIS > or not. Is there solid interest of the SAGA or GRASS team to adopt the > providers? Otherwise I guess they'll sooner or later will die. agreed fully > At the very least the packaging in OSGeo4W will have to adapted. The easiest > way would just to remove the dependencies. This should also kill the current > problem with the 2GB NSIS limit (GRASS depends on python2, SAGA has wxWidgets, > OTB Qt4). > > The plugins would be downloaded from within QGIS and instruct the user how > install the rest of the binaries (eg. from OSGeo4W or other sites (like OTB)). IMHO anything that does not work out of the box will be just unaccessible for a large part of users. Standalone packages have been a key of success for QGIS. All the best. -- Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu QGIS & PostGIS courses: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html https://www.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=IT&q=qgis,arcgis
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
