Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] RE : Re: OSGEO4W future

[Jachym Cepicky]

Hi,

I was thinking the same about UbuntuGIS, count me in.


Jachym

P.S. Thank you all for this positive feedback in the discussion

Dne 25.9.2013 15:54, Daniel Morissette napsal(a):
> FYI I talked with Alan yesterday about setting up a PSC for UbuntuGIS to
> increase this project's bus number.
> 
> Let's see what OSGeo4W does, and UbuntuGIS will likely adopt a similar
> approach.
> 
> I agree with those who wrote that we should aim to share as much as
> possible between the various distros, for instance we should aim to
> reuse/share the getting started docs produced by OSGeo-Live.
> 
> That being said I am not convinced that a single PSC overseeing all
> binary distros could be very efficient. OSGeo4W, UbuntuGIS, OSGeo-Live,
> etc, all have some commonalities, but also some big differences in the
> end product due to the nature of the platform that they target. Separate
> PSCs/teams focused on each platform seem more natural to me, even if
> some devs end up participating on multiple teams, but I'd be happy to be
> proven wrong of course.
> 
> Daniel
> 
> 
> On 13-09-25 9:43 AM, Frank Warmerdam wrote:
>> Folks,
>>
>> I have initiated an RFC for a project management committee for
>> OSGeo4W.  I'd encourage everyone interested in participating to joint
>> the osgeo4w-dev mailing list and to continue detailed discussion
>> there.
>>
>>   http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/osgeo4w-dev
>>
>> I think this list (osgeo-discuss) is a great place to discuss linkages
>> between different packaging efforts.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Frank
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 2:06 AM, Jo Cook 
>> wrote:
>>> The newest version of Portable GIS doesn't require quite so many admin
>>> privileges, but I've also slimmed it down dramatically so it fits on a
>>> smaller USB stick, so it contains a lot less software (no gvsig, no
>>> mysql
>>> etc). It is used extensively for training courses in the UK, without too
>>> many problems, and the new version should be better again as I have a
>>> windows 8 VM to test on at last.
>>>
>>> I'd like to bring Portable GIS in line with OSGeo4W and OSGeo Live- I've
>>> spoken to both Alex and Cameron about this in the past- but I have
>>> some work
>>> to do before that's possible- namely around documenting exactly which
>>> files
>>> I change, and also the build process. It's all in a local mercurial
>>> repository at the moment, but I'd really like to get it online. To be
>>> honest, my big concern is that I don't always have time to focus on
>>> things
>>> outside of my core work (maybe that will change post FOSS4G) and I can't
>>> guarantee being able to pitch in at release time, or even respond to
>>> issues
>>> in a timely manner. That's the main reason why I've kept it as a
>>> little pet
>>> project- so I'm not letting anyone else down!
>>>
>>> Sorry, didn't mean to hijack this discussion!
>>>
>>> I think it makes sense to come up with an over-arching
>>> project/committee/whatever that covers both OSGeo4W and OSGeo-Live, and
>>> maybe PortableGIS at some point, rather than separate projects. It's
>>> always
>>> better to share work rather than replicate it. Does anyone have any
>>> objections to that idea? Personally, I'd then sketch out the
>>> workflows for
>>> each, and figure out what make-up of committee would be required to
>>> oversee
>>> that and go through incubation.
>>>
>>> Jo
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Alex Mandel
>>> 
>>> wrote:

 On 09/24/2013 12:50 AM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Angelos Tzotsos
> 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> I am in favor of both OSGeoLive and OSGeo4W going through a few weeks
>> incubation process.
>>
>> Best,
>> Angelos
>>
> My own impression is that if we want to reach out to non-geek GIS
> users the ideal way would be a system like portable GIS with the great
> documentation of the live dvd, ie run and test the programs without
> needing to be admin or having to install different programs.

 I've researched this problem, talked with Jo (Current author of
 PortableGIS http://www.archaeogeek.com/portable-gis.html)

 There is almost no way to make this work without Admin priveleges on a
 windows machine. Some individual apps can be made to work by
 extensively
 modifying how they look for libs but many require things like a jvm to
 run on top of, or a mix of system an local libs (e.g. Visual C++ is
 required for many OSGeo4W apps and requires an install, that's actually
 about the only part that has to be installed vs just in the OSGeo4w
 folder).

 This is actually why I settled on helping create OSGeo Live bootable
 products and virtual machines. Of course this isn't perfect either as
 figuring out how to boot a disk or usb seems beyond some users, and the
 virtual machine still hits needing admin to install virtualization
 software.

 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] RE : Re: OSGEO4W future

[Jürgen E . Fischer]

Hi,

On Wed, 25. Sep 2013 at 15:36:17 -0700, Frank Warmerdam wrote:
> I agree with you, Daniel and Jurgen that we would be focused on windows
> though I am optimistic that OSGeo4W could also be a source for those trying
> to make custom windows installers (ie. Portable GIS, what I used to do with
> FWTools and possibly even Jeff with MS4W).

We already do that for QGIS - the NSIS standalone/double-click installer is
created from OSGeo4W packages.

So for me that already works quite well and I'm not really tempted to throw it
all overboard and start from scratch.


Jürgen

-- 
Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH   Tel. +49-4931-918175-31
Dipl.-Inf. (FH)   Rheinstraße 13Fax. +49-4931-918175-50
Software Engineer D-26506 Norden   http://www.norbit.de
QGIS PSC member (RM)   IRC: jef on FreeNode 


-- 
norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH
Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden
GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] RE : Re: OSGEO4W future

[Frank Warmerdam]

Tamas,

I agree with you, Daniel and Jurgen that we would be focused on windows
though I am optimistic that OSGeo4W could also be a source for those trying
to make custom windows installers (ie. Portable GIS, what I used to do with
FWTools and possibly even Jeff with MS4W).

Once we have a PSC, we need to discuss direction and then nail a plan down
and agree to it.

Best regards,
Frank


On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Tamas Szekeres  wrote:

> Frank,
>
> The RFC  looks pretty good,
> thanks for putting that together. Once the PSC is formed, I'm keen on
> writing a second one where we could start thinking about the primary
> objectives and requirements of the system we should realize, I think we all
> have quite some ideas, and experiences in creating windows builds (both
> positive and negative) which makes it possible to find out the right
> direction to follow.
>
> I also think packaging on Windows is a different thing, other platforms
> may apply for a separate governance regarding to the binary distributions,
> there might be some common aspects, though.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Tamas
>
>
>
> 2013/9/25 Frank Warmerdam 
>
>> Folks,
>>
>> I have initiated an RFC for a project management committee for
>> OSGeo4W.  I'd encourage everyone interested in participating to joint
>> the osgeo4w-dev mailing list and to continue detailed discussion
>> there.
>>
>>  http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/osgeo4w-dev
>>
>> I think this list (osgeo-discuss) is a great place to discuss linkages
>> between different packaging efforts.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Frank
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 2:06 AM, Jo Cook 
>> wrote:
>> > The newest version of Portable GIS doesn't require quite so many admin
>> > privileges, but I've also slimmed it down dramatically so it fits on a
>> > smaller USB stick, so it contains a lot less software (no gvsig, no
>> mysql
>> > etc). It is used extensively for training courses in the UK, without too
>> > many problems, and the new version should be better again as I have a
>> > windows 8 VM to test on at last.
>> >
>> > I'd like to bring Portable GIS in line with OSGeo4W and OSGeo Live- I've
>> > spoken to both Alex and Cameron about this in the past- but I have some
>> work
>> > to do before that's possible- namely around documenting exactly which
>> files
>> > I change, and also the build process. It's all in a local mercurial
>> > repository at the moment, but I'd really like to get it online. To be
>> > honest, my big concern is that I don't always have time to focus on
>> things
>> > outside of my core work (maybe that will change post FOSS4G) and I can't
>> > guarantee being able to pitch in at release time, or even respond to
>> issues
>> > in a timely manner. That's the main reason why I've kept it as a little
>> pet
>> > project- so I'm not letting anyone else down!
>> >
>> > Sorry, didn't mean to hijack this discussion!
>> >
>> > I think it makes sense to come up with an over-arching
>> > project/committee/whatever that covers both OSGeo4W and OSGeo-Live, and
>> > maybe PortableGIS at some point, rather than separate projects. It's
>> always
>> > better to share work rather than replicate it. Does anyone have any
>> > objections to that idea? Personally, I'd then sketch out the workflows
>> for
>> > each, and figure out what make-up of committee would be required to
>> oversee
>> > that and go through incubation.
>> >
>> > Jo
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Alex Mandel <
>> tech_...@wildintellect.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 09/24/2013 12:50 AM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
>> >> > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Angelos Tzotsos <
>> gcpp.kal...@gmail.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hi Daniel,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I am in favor of both OSGeoLive and OSGeo4W going through a few
>> weeks
>> >> >> incubation process.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Best,
>> >> >> Angelos
>> >> >>
>> >> > My own impression is that if we want to reach out to non-geek GIS
>> >> > users the ideal way would be a system like portable GIS with the
>> great
>> >> > documentation of the live dvd, ie run and test the programs without
>> >> > needing to be admin or having to install different programs.
>> >>
>> >> I've researched this problem, talked with Jo (Current author of
>> >> PortableGIS http://www.archaeogeek.com/portable-gis.html)
>> >>
>> >> There is almost no way to make this work without Admin priveleges on a
>> >> windows machine. Some individual apps can be made to work by
>> extensively
>> >> modifying how they look for libs but many require things like a jvm to
>> >> run on top of, or a mix of system an local libs (e.g. Visual C++ is
>> >> required for many OSGeo4W apps and requires an install, that's actually
>> >> about the only part that has to be installed vs just in the OSGeo4w
>> >> folder).
>> >>
>> >> This is actually why I settled on helping create OSGeo Live bootable
>> >> products and virtual machines. Of course this isn't per

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] RE : Re: OSGEO4W future

[Tamas Szekeres]

Frank,

The RFC  looks pretty good,
thanks for putting that together. Once the PSC is formed, I'm keen on
writing a second one where we could start thinking about the primary
objectives and requirements of the system we should realize, I think we all
have quite some ideas, and experiences in creating windows builds (both
positive and negative) which makes it possible to find out the right
direction to follow.

I also think packaging on Windows is a different thing, other platforms may
apply for a separate governance regarding to the binary distributions,
there might be some common aspects, though.

Best regards,

Tamas



2013/9/25 Frank Warmerdam 

> Folks,
>
> I have initiated an RFC for a project management committee for
> OSGeo4W.  I'd encourage everyone interested in participating to joint
> the osgeo4w-dev mailing list and to continue detailed discussion
> there.
>
>  http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/osgeo4w-dev
>
> I think this list (osgeo-discuss) is a great place to discuss linkages
> between different packaging efforts.
>
> Best regards,
> Frank
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 2:06 AM, Jo Cook 
> wrote:
> > The newest version of Portable GIS doesn't require quite so many admin
> > privileges, but I've also slimmed it down dramatically so it fits on a
> > smaller USB stick, so it contains a lot less software (no gvsig, no mysql
> > etc). It is used extensively for training courses in the UK, without too
> > many problems, and the new version should be better again as I have a
> > windows 8 VM to test on at last.
> >
> > I'd like to bring Portable GIS in line with OSGeo4W and OSGeo Live- I've
> > spoken to both Alex and Cameron about this in the past- but I have some
> work
> > to do before that's possible- namely around documenting exactly which
> files
> > I change, and also the build process. It's all in a local mercurial
> > repository at the moment, but I'd really like to get it online. To be
> > honest, my big concern is that I don't always have time to focus on
> things
> > outside of my core work (maybe that will change post FOSS4G) and I can't
> > guarantee being able to pitch in at release time, or even respond to
> issues
> > in a timely manner. That's the main reason why I've kept it as a little
> pet
> > project- so I'm not letting anyone else down!
> >
> > Sorry, didn't mean to hijack this discussion!
> >
> > I think it makes sense to come up with an over-arching
> > project/committee/whatever that covers both OSGeo4W and OSGeo-Live, and
> > maybe PortableGIS at some point, rather than separate projects. It's
> always
> > better to share work rather than replicate it. Does anyone have any
> > objections to that idea? Personally, I'd then sketch out the workflows
> for
> > each, and figure out what make-up of committee would be required to
> oversee
> > that and go through incubation.
> >
> > Jo
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Alex Mandel  >
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 09/24/2013 12:50 AM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Angelos Tzotsos <
> gcpp.kal...@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi Daniel,
> >> >>
> >> >> I am in favor of both OSGeoLive and OSGeo4W going through a few weeks
> >> >> incubation process.
> >> >>
> >> >> Best,
> >> >> Angelos
> >> >>
> >> > My own impression is that if we want to reach out to non-geek GIS
> >> > users the ideal way would be a system like portable GIS with the great
> >> > documentation of the live dvd, ie run and test the programs without
> >> > needing to be admin or having to install different programs.
> >>
> >> I've researched this problem, talked with Jo (Current author of
> >> PortableGIS http://www.archaeogeek.com/portable-gis.html)
> >>
> >> There is almost no way to make this work without Admin priveleges on a
> >> windows machine. Some individual apps can be made to work by extensively
> >> modifying how they look for libs but many require things like a jvm to
> >> run on top of, or a mix of system an local libs (e.g. Visual C++ is
> >> required for many OSGeo4W apps and requires an install, that's actually
> >> about the only part that has to be installed vs just in the OSGeo4w
> >> folder).
> >>
> >> This is actually why I settled on helping create OSGeo Live bootable
> >> products and virtual machines. Of course this isn't perfect either as
> >> figuring out how to boot a disk or usb seems beyond some users, and the
> >> virtual machine still hits needing admin to install virtualization
> >> software.
> >>
> >> I also agree there's no reason many of the documentation efforts can't
> >> be shared.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Alex
> >> ___
> >> Discuss mailing list
> >> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jo Cook
> > Astun Technology Ltd, The Coach House, 17 West Street, Epsom, Surrey,
> KT18
> > 7RL, UK
> > t:+44 7930 524 155
> 

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] RE : Re: OSGEO4W future

[Jürgen E . Fischer]

Hi,

On Wed, 25. Sep 2013 at 06:43:21 -0700, Frank Warmerdam wrote:
> I have initiated an RFC for a project management committee for OSGeo4W.

Thanks.

> I'd encourage everyone interested in participating to joint the osgeo4w-dev
> mailing list and to continue detailed discussion there.
 
>  http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/osgeo4w-dev
 
> I think this list (osgeo-discuss) is a great place to discuss linkages
> between different packaging efforts.

Probably,  I just subscribed here.  So I missed the initial discussion
(although meanwhile read up in the archive).

On Wed, 25. Sep 2013 at 09:54:11 -0400, Daniel Morissette wrote:
> That being said I am not convinced that a single PSC overseeing all  binary
> distros could be very efficient. OSGeo4W, UbuntuGIS, OSGeo-Live,  etc, all
> have some commonalities, but also some big differences in the  end product
> due to the nature of the platform that they target. Separate  PSCs/teams
> focused on each platform seem more natural to me, even if  some devs end up
> participating on multiple teams, but I'd be happy to be  proven wrong of
> course.

I also expect separate projects to work better - packaging is probably more
about the differences of platforms than their commonalities.  But as I'm doing
the debian (and in turn ubuntugis) and the OSGeo4W packaging of QGIS, I'm
probably a bad example for that point.

I also believe coordination could become a problem, if we try to get everything
under one umbrella.


Jürgen

-- 
Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH   Tel. +49-4931-918175-31
Dipl.-Inf. (FH)   Rheinstraße 13Fax. +49-4931-918175-50
Software Engineer D-26506 Norden   http://www.norbit.de
QGIS PSC member (RM)   IRC: jef on FreeNode 


-- 
norBIT Gesellschaft fuer Unternehmensberatung und Informationssysteme mbH
Rheinstrasse 13, 26506 Norden
GF: Jelto Buurman, HR: Amtsgericht Emden, HRB 5502

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] RE : Re: OSGEO4W future

[Daniel Morissette]

FYI I talked with Alan yesterday about setting up a PSC for UbuntuGIS to 
increase this project's bus number.


Let's see what OSGeo4W does, and UbuntuGIS will likely adopt a similar 
approach.


I agree with those who wrote that we should aim to share as much as 
possible between the various distros, for instance we should aim to 
reuse/share the getting started docs produced by OSGeo-Live.


That being said I am not convinced that a single PSC overseeing all 
binary distros could be very efficient. OSGeo4W, UbuntuGIS, OSGeo-Live, 
etc, all have some commonalities, but also some big differences in the 
end product due to the nature of the platform that they target. Separate 
PSCs/teams focused on each platform seem more natural to me, even if 
some devs end up participating on multiple teams, but I'd be happy to be 
proven wrong of course.


Daniel


On 13-09-25 9:43 AM, Frank Warmerdam wrote:

Folks,

I have initiated an RFC for a project management committee for
OSGeo4W.  I'd encourage everyone interested in participating to joint
the osgeo4w-dev mailing list and to continue detailed discussion
there.

  http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/osgeo4w-dev

I think this list (osgeo-discuss) is a great place to discuss linkages
between different packaging efforts.

Best regards,
Frank


On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 2:06 AM, Jo Cook  wrote:

The newest version of Portable GIS doesn't require quite so many admin
privileges, but I've also slimmed it down dramatically so it fits on a
smaller USB stick, so it contains a lot less software (no gvsig, no mysql
etc). It is used extensively for training courses in the UK, without too
many problems, and the new version should be better again as I have a
windows 8 VM to test on at last.

I'd like to bring Portable GIS in line with OSGeo4W and OSGeo Live- I've
spoken to both Alex and Cameron about this in the past- but I have some work
to do before that's possible- namely around documenting exactly which files
I change, and also the build process. It's all in a local mercurial
repository at the moment, but I'd really like to get it online. To be
honest, my big concern is that I don't always have time to focus on things
outside of my core work (maybe that will change post FOSS4G) and I can't
guarantee being able to pitch in at release time, or even respond to issues
in a timely manner. That's the main reason why I've kept it as a little pet
project- so I'm not letting anyone else down!

Sorry, didn't mean to hijack this discussion!

I think it makes sense to come up with an over-arching
project/committee/whatever that covers both OSGeo4W and OSGeo-Live, and
maybe PortableGIS at some point, rather than separate projects. It's always
better to share work rather than replicate it. Does anyone have any
objections to that idea? Personally, I'd then sketch out the workflows for
each, and figure out what make-up of committee would be required to oversee
that and go through incubation.

Jo


On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Alex Mandel 
wrote:


On 09/24/2013 12:50 AM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Angelos Tzotsos 
wrote:



Hi Daniel,

I am in favor of both OSGeoLive and OSGeo4W going through a few weeks
incubation process.

Best,
Angelos


My own impression is that if we want to reach out to non-geek GIS
users the ideal way would be a system like portable GIS with the great
documentation of the live dvd, ie run and test the programs without
needing to be admin or having to install different programs.


I've researched this problem, talked with Jo (Current author of
PortableGIS http://www.archaeogeek.com/portable-gis.html)

There is almost no way to make this work without Admin priveleges on a
windows machine. Some individual apps can be made to work by extensively
modifying how they look for libs but many require things like a jvm to
run on top of, or a mix of system an local libs (e.g. Visual C++ is
required for many OSGeo4W apps and requires an install, that's actually
about the only part that has to be installed vs just in the OSGeo4w
folder).

This is actually why I settled on helping create OSGeo Live bootable
products and virtual machines. Of course this isn't perfect either as
figuring out how to boot a disk or usb seems beyond some users, and the
virtual machine still hits needing admin to install virtualization
software.

I also agree there's no reason many of the documentation efforts can't
be shared.

Thanks,
Alex
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss





--
Jo Cook
Astun Technology Ltd, The Coach House, 17 West Street, Epsom, Surrey, KT18
7RL, UK
t:+44 7930 524 155
iShare - Data integration and publishing platform

*

Company registration no. 5410695. Registered in England and Wales.
Registered office: 120 Manor Green Road, Epsom, Surrey, KT19 8LN VAT no.
864201149.

___

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] RE : Re: OSGEO4W future

[Frank Warmerdam]

Folks,

I have initiated an RFC for a project management committee for
OSGeo4W.  I'd encourage everyone interested in participating to joint
the osgeo4w-dev mailing list and to continue detailed discussion
there.

 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/osgeo4w-dev

I think this list (osgeo-discuss) is a great place to discuss linkages
between different packaging efforts.

Best regards,
Frank


On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 2:06 AM, Jo Cook  wrote:
> The newest version of Portable GIS doesn't require quite so many admin
> privileges, but I've also slimmed it down dramatically so it fits on a
> smaller USB stick, so it contains a lot less software (no gvsig, no mysql
> etc). It is used extensively for training courses in the UK, without too
> many problems, and the new version should be better again as I have a
> windows 8 VM to test on at last.
>
> I'd like to bring Portable GIS in line with OSGeo4W and OSGeo Live- I've
> spoken to both Alex and Cameron about this in the past- but I have some work
> to do before that's possible- namely around documenting exactly which files
> I change, and also the build process. It's all in a local mercurial
> repository at the moment, but I'd really like to get it online. To be
> honest, my big concern is that I don't always have time to focus on things
> outside of my core work (maybe that will change post FOSS4G) and I can't
> guarantee being able to pitch in at release time, or even respond to issues
> in a timely manner. That's the main reason why I've kept it as a little pet
> project- so I'm not letting anyone else down!
>
> Sorry, didn't mean to hijack this discussion!
>
> I think it makes sense to come up with an over-arching
> project/committee/whatever that covers both OSGeo4W and OSGeo-Live, and
> maybe PortableGIS at some point, rather than separate projects. It's always
> better to share work rather than replicate it. Does anyone have any
> objections to that idea? Personally, I'd then sketch out the workflows for
> each, and figure out what make-up of committee would be required to oversee
> that and go through incubation.
>
> Jo
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Alex Mandel 
> wrote:
>>
>> On 09/24/2013 12:50 AM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
>> > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Angelos Tzotsos 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Hi Daniel,
>> >>
>> >> I am in favor of both OSGeoLive and OSGeo4W going through a few weeks
>> >> incubation process.
>> >>
>> >> Best,
>> >> Angelos
>> >>
>> > My own impression is that if we want to reach out to non-geek GIS
>> > users the ideal way would be a system like portable GIS with the great
>> > documentation of the live dvd, ie run and test the programs without
>> > needing to be admin or having to install different programs.
>>
>> I've researched this problem, talked with Jo (Current author of
>> PortableGIS http://www.archaeogeek.com/portable-gis.html)
>>
>> There is almost no way to make this work without Admin priveleges on a
>> windows machine. Some individual apps can be made to work by extensively
>> modifying how they look for libs but many require things like a jvm to
>> run on top of, or a mix of system an local libs (e.g. Visual C++ is
>> required for many OSGeo4W apps and requires an install, that's actually
>> about the only part that has to be installed vs just in the OSGeo4w
>> folder).
>>
>> This is actually why I settled on helping create OSGeo Live bootable
>> products and virtual machines. Of course this isn't perfect either as
>> figuring out how to boot a disk or usb seems beyond some users, and the
>> virtual machine still hits needing admin to install virtualization
>> software.
>>
>> I also agree there's no reason many of the documentation efforts can't
>> be shared.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alex
>> ___
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
>
>
>
> --
> Jo Cook
> Astun Technology Ltd, The Coach House, 17 West Street, Epsom, Surrey, KT18
> 7RL, UK
> t:+44 7930 524 155
> iShare - Data integration and publishing platform
>
> *
>
> Company registration no. 5410695. Registered in England and Wales.
> Registered office: 120 Manor Green Road, Epsom, Surrey, KT19 8LN VAT no.
> 864201149.
>
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss



-- 
---+--
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmer...@pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush| Geospatial Software Developer
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] RE : Re: OSGEO4W future

[Jo Cook]

The newest version of Portable GIS doesn't require quite so many admin
privileges, but I've also slimmed it down dramatically so it fits on a
smaller USB stick, so it contains a lot less software (no gvsig, no mysql
etc). It is used extensively for training courses in the UK, without too
many problems, and the new version should be better again as I have a
windows 8 VM to test on at last.

I'd like to bring Portable GIS in line with OSGeo4W and OSGeo Live- I've
spoken to both Alex and Cameron about this in the past- but I have some
work to do before that's possible- namely around documenting exactly which
files I change, and also the build process. It's all in a local mercurial
repository at the moment, but I'd really like to get it online. To be
honest, my big concern is that I don't always have time to focus on things
outside of my core work (maybe that will change post FOSS4G) and I can't
guarantee being able to pitch in at release time, or even respond to issues
in a timely manner. That's the main reason why I've kept it as a little pet
project- so I'm not letting anyone else down!

Sorry, didn't mean to hijack this discussion!

I think it makes sense to come up with an over-arching
project/committee/whatever that covers both OSGeo4W and OSGeo-Live, and
maybe PortableGIS at some point, rather than separate projects. It's always
better to share work rather than replicate it. Does anyone have any
objections to that idea? Personally, I'd then sketch out the workflows for
each, and figure out what make-up of committee would be required to oversee
that and go through incubation.

Jo


On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Alex Mandel wrote:

> On 09/24/2013 12:50 AM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Angelos Tzotsos 
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Hi Daniel,
> >>
> >> I am in favor of both OSGeoLive and OSGeo4W going through a few weeks
> >> incubation process.
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Angelos
> >>
> > My own impression is that if we want to reach out to non-geek GIS
> > users the ideal way would be a system like portable GIS with the great
> > documentation of the live dvd, ie run and test the programs without
> > needing to be admin or having to install different programs.
>
> I've researched this problem, talked with Jo (Current author of
> PortableGIS http://www.archaeogeek.com/portable-gis.html)
>
> There is almost no way to make this work without Admin priveleges on a
> windows machine. Some individual apps can be made to work by extensively
> modifying how they look for libs but many require things like a jvm to
> run on top of, or a mix of system an local libs (e.g. Visual C++ is
> required for many OSGeo4W apps and requires an install, that's actually
> about the only part that has to be installed vs just in the OSGeo4w
> folder).
>
> This is actually why I settled on helping create OSGeo Live bootable
> products and virtual machines. Of course this isn't perfect either as
> figuring out how to boot a disk or usb seems beyond some users, and the
> virtual machine still hits needing admin to install virtualization
> software.
>
> I also agree there's no reason many of the documentation efforts can't
> be shared.
>
> Thanks,
> Alex
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>



-- 
***Jo Cook*
Astun Technology Ltd, The Coach House, 17 West Street, Epsom, Surrey, KT18
7RL, UK
t:+44 7930 524 155
iShare - Data integration and publishing platform

*

 Company registration no. 5410695. Registered in England and Wales.
Registered office: 120 Manor Green Road, Epsom, Surrey, KT19 8LN VAT no.
864201149.
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] RE : Re: OSGEO4W future

[Alex Mandel]

On 09/24/2013 12:50 AM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Angelos Tzotsos  
> wrote:
> 
>>
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>> I am in favor of both OSGeoLive and OSGeo4W going through a few weeks
>> incubation process.
>>
>> Best,
>> Angelos
>>
> My own impression is that if we want to reach out to non-geek GIS
> users the ideal way would be a system like portable GIS with the great
> documentation of the live dvd, ie run and test the programs without
> needing to be admin or having to install different programs.

I've researched this problem, talked with Jo (Current author of
PortableGIS http://www.archaeogeek.com/portable-gis.html)

There is almost no way to make this work without Admin priveleges on a
windows machine. Some individual apps can be made to work by extensively
modifying how they look for libs but many require things like a jvm to
run on top of, or a mix of system an local libs (e.g. Visual C++ is
required for many OSGeo4W apps and requires an install, that's actually
about the only part that has to be installed vs just in the OSGeo4w folder).

This is actually why I settled on helping create OSGeo Live bootable
products and virtual machines. Of course this isn't perfect either as
figuring out how to boot a disk or usb seems beyond some users, and the
virtual machine still hits needing admin to install virtualization software.

I also agree there's no reason many of the documentation efforts can't
be shared.

Thanks,
Alex
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] RE : Re: OSGEO4W future

[Johan Van de Wauw]

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Angelos Tzotsos  wrote:

>
> Hi Daniel,
>
> I am in favor of both OSGeoLive and OSGeo4W going through a few weeks
> incubation process.
>
> Best,
> Angelos
>
>

I'd like to add that I think both projects could be working together
very closely. For me the major value in OSGeoLive are the project
overviews and quickstarts. I''ve pointed them out to many windows
users interested in open source GIS to get an overview of what is
possible with open source gis,and I'm actually basing a training on
them as well.
My own impression is that if we want to reach out to non-geek GIS
users the ideal way would be a system like portable GIS with the great
documentation of the live dvd, ie run and test the programs without
needing to be admin or having to install different programs.
My experience of building packages on windows is scanty, but if more
people support this idea I'm definitely willing to stand up and do
part of the work, if only because I'll need training material for
windows.
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] RE : Re: OSGEO4W future

[Paolo Cavallini]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Il 24/09/2013 02:08, Angelos Tzotsos ha scritto:

> I am in favor of both OSGeoLive and OSGeo4W going through a few weeks 
> incubation
> process.

Hi all.
Incubation is not an issue. The problem, IMHO, is to find a good and productive
governance model. Ideas?
All the best.
- -- 
Paolo Cavallini - Faunalia
www.faunalia.eu
Full contact details at www.faunalia.eu/pc
Nuovi corsi QGIS e PostGIS: http://www.faunalia.it/calendario
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlJBM48ACgkQ/NedwLUzIr6h1wCfe52QTao6SbOl8NHI7Z49psD6
4cMAnR/5kqK/rqReWSbqErGuEbmcFt2h
=/NX2
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] RE : Re: OSGEO4W future

[Angelos Tzotsos]

On 09/24/2013 02:57 AM, Daniel Morissette wrote:

On 13-09-23 11:08 AM, Paolo Cavallini wrote:


Hi Daniel,
I see two possibilities here:
* osgeo4w is an official foundation project, and as such it does not
need to apply for incubation (it would be circular reasoning); in this
case the PSC should be appointed by the foundation, or
* it is an independent project, thus following the usual procedure; in
this case, better not to use the osgeo4w name and logo, and let the
devs self organize.
Thoughts?


Hi Paolo,

Even the founding projects of OSGeo (MapServer, GRASS, MapGuide, etc.) 
did go through incubation, so I think OSGeo4W should go through the 
same path. Since it is already handled by people who know "the OSGeo 
way" it will simply be faster and mostly a matter of running it agains 
the checklist. If its incubation can be completed in a few weeks then 
that's just better.


Daniel



Hi Daniel,

I am in favor of both OSGeoLive and OSGeo4W going through a few weeks 
incubation process.


Best,
Angelos

--
Angelos Tzotsos
Remote Sensing Laboratory
National Technical University of Athens
http://users.ntua.gr/tzotsos

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] RE : Re: OSGEO4W future

[Daniel Morissette]

On 13-09-23 11:08 AM, Paolo Cavallini wrote:


Hi Daniel,
I see two possibilities here:
* osgeo4w is an official foundation project, and as such it does not
need to apply for incubation (it would be circular reasoning); in this
case the PSC should be appointed by the foundation, or
* it is an independent project, thus following the usual procedure; in
this case, better not to use the osgeo4w name and logo, and let the
devs self organize.
Thoughts?


Hi Paolo,

Even the founding projects of OSGeo (MapServer, GRASS, MapGuide, etc.) 
did go through incubation, so I think OSGeo4W should go through the same 
path. Since it is already handled by people who know "the OSGeo way" it 
will simply be faster and mostly a matter of running it agains the 
checklist. If its incubation can be completed in a few weeks then that's 
just better.


Daniel

--
Daniel Morissette
http://www.mapgears.com/
Provider of Professional MapServer Support since 2000

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] RE : Re: OSGEO4W future

[Paolo Cavallini]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Il 22/09/2013 10:41, Daniel Morissette ha scritto:

> Personally I'd treat OSGeo4W as a software project, with a PSC, 
> committers, etc. We should do the same with OSGeo-Live actually,
> take it out of the Marketing committee and treat it as a sofware
> project which is what it si really is.
> 
> Then projects (OSGeo4W and OSGeo-Live) can apply for incubation
> when they are resdy, etc.

Hi Daniel,
I see two possibilities here:
* osgeo4w is an official foundation project, and as such it does not
need to apply for incubation (it would be circular reasoning); in this
case the PSC should be appointed by the foundation, or
* it is an independent project, thus following the usual procedure; in
this case, better not to use the osgeo4w name and logo, and let the
devs self organize.
Thoughts?
All the best.
- -- 
Paolo Cavallini - Faunalia
www.faunalia.eu
Full contact details at www.faunalia.eu/pc
Nuovi corsi QGIS e PostGIS: http://www.faunalia.it/calendario
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAlJAWYEACgkQ/NedwLUzIr5mowCfR7mK5Pc4ilRIiDFcNeVhoXg6
P1AAnjXOOrS223GxtOajjoxdARUD0h1M
=qzGS
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] [Board] RE : Re: OSGEO4W future

[Daniel Morissette]

On 13-09-22 3:44 AM, Paolo Cavallini wrote:

Hi all.
I agree with Tamas: we first have an issue with governance; once this is
solved, we can deal with tech issues.
Anyone a suggestion to move forward? To me, the first candidates that
come to mind are Frank, Tamas, and Juergen: anyone else?
Board, could this be a special OSGeo committee?
Thanks.



Personally I'd treat OSGeo4W as a software project, with a PSC, 
committers, etc. We should do the same with OSGeo-Live actually, take it 
out of the Marketing committee and treat it as a sofware project which 
is what it si really is.


Then projects (OSGeo4W and OSGeo-Live) can apply for incubation when 
they are resdy, etc.


--
Daniel Morissette
http://www.mapgears.com/
Provider of Professional MapServer Support since 2000

___
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss