Re: [GRASS-dev] [OSGeo-Discuss] [OSGeo @ GSoC 2021] Call for Projects to Prepare Project Ideas Page for Google Summer of Code 2021

2021-02-09 Thread Anna Petrášová 
Hi devs, please consider adding yourself as co-mentors here:

https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/GSoC/2021

On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 11:42 PM Anna Petrášová 
wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> please look at our 2021 GSoC page and if you are interested, add new ideas
> and add yourself as possible (co)mentors:
> https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/GSoC/2021
>
> Note that this year the projects are supposed to be smaller (175 hours
> instead of 350 hours), which in our case is not a huge problem, since the
> topics are quite flexible in this regard.
>
> Best,
> Anna
>
> -- Forwarded message -
> From: Rajat Shinde 
> Date: Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 10:09 AM
> Subject: [OSGeo-Discuss] [OSGeo @ GSoC 2021] Call for Projects to Prepare
> Project Ideas Page for Google Summer of Code 2021
> To: OSGeo Discussions , OSGeo-SoC <
> s...@lists.osgeo.org>, 
> Cc: gsoc-adminosgeo.org 
>
>
> Dear All,
>
> Greetings!
>
> It is the time of the year to start preparing for the OSGeo's
> participation with the Google Summer of Code 2021 [1] and we need your help
> for the same. With a 100% success for all the GSoC 2020 student projects
> [2], we are highly excited and motivated to invite the OSGeo projects
> (Projects, Incubation projects, Guest Projects) to begin compiling the
> project ideas for GSoC 2021.
>
> In order to participate in proposing ideas as a project under OSGeo
> umbrella organisation, you just need to send us (admins:   osgeo dot org>) the URL for your project's GSoC ideas Wiki page. If you are
> participating for the first time, then you may visit [3] [4] for reference.
>
> Please remember that every idea should indicate:
>
> • A title
> • A description
> • 2 Mentors' Details
> • A test for the students to submit to your evaluation. The test aims
> at evaluating if the student is capable for the project, so please design
> the test having in mind the basic skills required to complete the project.
>
> The organisation application period starts Jan 30, 2021 and will be open
> till Feb 20, 2021. So, we expect all the URLs by Feb 10, 2021. Here is the
> complete GSoC 2021 timeline [5].
>
> *Note:* GSoC 2021 comes with some new changes in the program. We
> sincerely request to go through the announcement mentioning new changes [6].
>
> Thanks and please forward the information to your respective projects
> mailing list!
>
> Kind regards,
> Rahul and Rajat
> (On behalf of the OSGeo GSoC Admins Team)
>
> [1] https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/
> [2] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Google_Summer_of_Code_2020
> [3] https://github.com/pgRouting/pgrouting/wiki/GSoC-Ideas:-2021
> [4] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Google_Summer_of_Code_2020_Ideas
> [5] https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/how-it-works/#timeline
> [6]
> https://opensource.googleblog.com/2020/10/google-summer-of-code-2021-is-bringing.html
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> disc...@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
___
grass-dev mailing list
grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev

Re: [GRASS-dev] [OSGeo-Discuss] [OSGeo @ GSoC 2021] Call for Projects to Prepare Project Ideas Page for Google Summer of Code 2021

2021-02-09 Thread Anna Petrášová 
Dear OSGeo GSoC Admin team,

here is the project ideas page for GRASS GIS:

https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/GSoC/2021

Best,
Anna

On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 10:09 AM Rajat Shinde 
wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> Greetings!
>
> It is the time of the year to start preparing for the OSGeo's
> participation with the Google Summer of Code 2021 [1] and we need your help
> for the same. With a 100% success for all the GSoC 2020 student projects
> [2], we are highly excited and motivated to invite the OSGeo projects
> (Projects, Incubation projects, Guest Projects) to begin compiling the
> project ideas for GSoC 2021.
>
> In order to participate in proposing ideas as a project under OSGeo
> umbrella organisation, you just need to send us (admins:   osgeo dot org>) the URL for your project's GSoC ideas Wiki page. If you are
> participating for the first time, then you may visit [3] [4] for reference.
>
> Please remember that every idea should indicate:
>
> • A title
> • A description
> • 2 Mentors' Details
> • A test for the students to submit to your evaluation. The test aims
> at evaluating if the student is capable for the project, so please design
> the test having in mind the basic skills required to complete the project.
>
> The organisation application period starts Jan 30, 2021 and will be open
> till Feb 20, 2021. So, we expect all the URLs by Feb 10, 2021. Here is the
> complete GSoC 2021 timeline [5].
>
> *Note:* GSoC 2021 comes with some new changes in the program. We
> sincerely request to go through the announcement mentioning new changes [6].
>
> Thanks and please forward the information to your respective projects
> mailing list!
>
> Kind regards,
> Rahul and Rajat
> (On behalf of the OSGeo GSoC Admins Team)
>
> [1] https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/
> [2] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Google_Summer_of_Code_2020
> [3] https://github.com/pgRouting/pgrouting/wiki/GSoC-Ideas:-2021
> [4] https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Google_Summer_of_Code_2020_Ideas
> [5] https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/how-it-works/#timeline
> [6]
> https://opensource.googleblog.com/2020/10/google-summer-of-code-2021-is-bringing.html
> ___
> Discuss mailing list
> disc...@lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>
___
grass-dev mailing list
grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev

Re: [GRASS-dev] Should we use GitHub Discussions?

2021-02-09 Thread Vaclav Petras 
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 3:59 PM Markus Neteler  wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 9:50 PM Vaclav Petras  wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 4:01 AM Markus Neteler  wrote:
> >>
> > If we had a presence on StackExchange like QGIS has, we wouldn't be
> having a discussion about GitHub Discussions in the first place.
>
> Try this:
>
> https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grass
> --> 2,027 questions
>

I wish this would indicate a healthy community and I wish we would have one
there. However, with a small sample from questions with recent activity, I
see only a couple of users answering (2 or so; BTW thanks! you know who you
are) and from the 2027 questions tagged grass, there are "475 questions
with no upvoted or accepted answers" [1]. This does not sound like what is
in the original Nyall's email against QGIS using GitHub Discussions which
says "there's LOTS of informed users answering all the QGIS questions on
gis.stackexchange." [2]. Perhaps even more telling is that no one except
myself [3] mentioned GIS StackExchange in this discussion up until now.

[1] https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grass?tab=Unanswered
[2] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/2021-February/009244.html
[3] https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-dev/2021-January/094867.html
___
grass-dev mailing list
grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev

Re: [GRASS-dev] Min. req. of programming language standard support, GRASS GIS 8

2021-02-09 Thread Markus Metz 
Just for clarification,

C code written for an older C standard works fine with newer C standards.

This is different with Python: code written for a previous Python version
might no longer work with a newer Python version.

Increasing the C standard for existing GRASS C code is safe, it will still
compile and work.

Increasing the Python version is not safe because existing GRASS Python
code might not be compatible with newer Python versions, thus the need for
a minimum required Python version.

Markus M

On Sun, Feb 7, 2021 at 10:36 PM Markus Metz 
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 7, 2021 at 4:07 PM Moritz Lennert <
mlenn...@club.worldonline.be> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Am 7. Februar 2021 05:01:38 MEZ schrieb "Anna Petrášová" <
kratocha...@gmail.com>:
> > >On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 2:47 PM Anna Petrášová 
wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 11:20 AM Nicklas Larsson 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Friday, 29 January 2021, 18:50:34 CET, Anna Petrášová <
> > >>> kratocha...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 4:28 AM Nicklas Larsson via grass-dev <
> > >>> grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org> wrote:
> > >>> > Dear Devs!
> > >>> >
> > >>> > As a relatively new member of the GRASS GIS dev community, I have
had
> > >>> to search for information on mailing lists, old trac comments etc.
> > >>> regarding coding practice and in particular minimum programming
language
> > >>> standard support. Ending up in not entirely conclusive
understanding. Up
> > >>> until now, I have been mostly involved in Python development and
I’m still
> > >>> not absolutely certain, although I assume 3.5 is minimum version.
And I’m
> > >>> not alone, see e.g. [1].
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Now, I’ve encountered a similar dilemma with C standard support,
> > >>> attempting to address compiler warnings [2], in particular with the
PR
> > >>> #1256 [3].
> > >>> >
> > >>> > I would be great if there were a (one) place where the min
support of
> > >>> Python version, C (C89, C99, C11, C17…) and C++ (C++03, C++11,
C++14 …)
> > >>> standard is stated -- loud and clear. Obviously, there has to be a
> > >>> consensus in the community on these matters for that to happen.
Such a
> > >>> statement will also have to be revised now and then. (A related
question is
> > >>> also whether or not to support 32 bit, which I know have been raised
> > >>> recently).
> > >>> >
> > >>> > I’d appreciate your opinion is on this issue!
> > >>> > Let me put up a a suggestion for min. req. for coming GRASS GIS 8
as a
> > >>> starting point of discussion:
> > >>> > - Python 3.7
> > >>> > - C11
> > >>> > - C++11
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> > Best regards,
> > >>> > Nicklas
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> > >>> Regarding Python, not sure if we shouldn't set 3.6 as minimum for
G8, it
> > >>> is still used e.g. in Ubuntu 18. Any reason to set 3.7 as minimum,
some
> > >>> specific features we would want to use?
> > >>>
> > >>> Anna
> > >>>
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> > [1] https://github.com/OSGeo/grass/issues/1241
> > >>> > [2] https://github.com/OSGeo/grass/issues/1247
> > >>> > [3] https://github.com/OSGeo/grass/pull/1256
> > >>> >
> > >>> > ___
> > >>> > grass-dev mailing list
> > >>> > grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org
> > >>> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Well, I don’t have a very strong opinion regarding 3.7, but
personally
> > >>> I’d say 3.6 is an absolute minimum. I presume, for example, most of
us
> > >>> would prefer to use f-strings for string formatting.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> yes, f-strings are nice although they have limitations for using with
> > >> translatable strings (Vashek can expand on that)
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On the other hand, 3.6 will reach end-of-support at the end of this
year
> > >>> right after its 5th birthday party and the support for data classes
in 3.7
> > >>> may potentially offer intriguing applications in G8.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> I noticed the data classes as well. Given 3.6 is reaching
end-of-support
> > >> soon, I agree with 3.7 for G8. I assume grass would be compatible
with 3.6
> > >> for a while anyway.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> Ubuntu 18 has Python 3.6 and Debian 9 has Python 3.5! What will
make the
> > >>> lowest common denominator? Debian 10 and Ubuntu 20 actually
supports Python
> > >>> 3.7 and 3.8 respectively. Forgive me if I’m ignorant, but isn’t it
possible
> > >>> to upgrade Python version on Ubuntu? Or is it just a pain with
package
> > >>> dependencies? Relying on default Python has never/rarely been a
luxury for
> > >>> other platforms.
> > >>>
> > >>> That being said, I think the most important part of this is that the
> > >>> community make a clear decision on min. supported Python version.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >This GDAL's RFC [1] is helpful in summarizing the issue with Python.
> > >Looking more into this, I

Re: [GRASS-dev] Should we use GitHub Discussions?

2021-02-09 Thread Markus Neteler 
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 9:50 PM Vaclav Petras  wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 4:01 AM Markus Neteler  wrote:
>>
> If we had a presence on StackExchange like QGIS has, we wouldn't be having a 
> discussion about GitHub Discussions in the first place.

Try this:

https://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/grass
--> 2,027 questions

Markus
___
grass-dev mailing list
grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev

Re: [GRASS-dev] Should we use GitHub Discussions?

2021-02-09 Thread Vaclav Petras 
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 4:01 AM Markus Neteler  wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 5:40 AM Vaclav Petras  wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 5:49 PM Luca Delucchi 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 at 08:49, massimo di stefano
> >>  wrote:
> >> > ‘’’
> >> >  I think emails (and mailing lists) are awesome, but mailing lists
> are increasingly seen as archaic and not accessible
> >> > ‘’’
> >> >
> >> > What about migrating our mailing list to mailman3?
> >> > The postorius interface looks modern and when integrated with hyper
> kitty, allows an easy access to the list archives (including search and
> post statistics).
> >> >
> >>
> >> I fully agree with this proposal, but this should be done at OSGeo
> >> Level, Massimo do you want to investigate this solution with SAC?
>
> Did anyone open a ticket for that? I didn't see it yet in case.
>
> > Or I can click on that one checkbox in GitHub settings. :-)
>
> Not sure.
> Please also note that QGIS is actually closing their GitHub
> Discussions for reasons also having mentioned here.
> See
> https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/2021-February/009244.html
>

If we had a presence on StackExchange like QGIS has, we wouldn't be having
a discussion about GitHub Discussions in the first place.
___
grass-dev mailing list
grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev

[GRASS-dev] Elections results and new GRASS GIS PSC

2021-02-09 Thread Moritz Lennert 
[Online version of this announcement: 
https://grass.osgeo.org/news/2021_02_05_new_grass_psc/ 
]



 New GRASS GIS Project Steering Committee

By the end of last year, the GRASS GIS project called for PSC members 
election. A total of/13 GRASS GIS contributors/were nominated by the 
community to cover the nine PSC positions.


After the election itself, the new GRASS GIS PSC is composed of the 
following nine members ranked by number of votes:


 * Markus Neteler (95)
 * Anna Petrášová (88)
 * Helena Mitášová (86)
 * Martin Landa (83)
 * Verónica Andreo (76)
 * Moritz Lennert (74)
 * Václav Petráš (68)
 * Michael Barton (58)
 * Huidae Cho (56)

For completeness, all relevant candidacy communications, as well as 
details about the voting process, have been published 
at:https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/PSC/Election2020 



On behalf of the GRASS GIS project, we would like to thank/Hernán De 
Angelis/who agreed to serve as Chief Returning Officer (CRO) and all 
community members for their participation. Furthermore, we want to 
acknowledge the contributions of former PSC members and all nominees. 
The development of GRASS GIS is a collective effort and we are all part 
of it regardless of our role. So,*CONGRATS to everyone!*



 New PSC chair person

There’s yet one more change to report. GRASS GIS PSC has a new chair 
person:*Veronica Andreo* . She works as a 
researcher in Argentina focusing on environmental drivers of 
vector-borne disease outbreaks and works primarily with satellite 
imagery and GIS-based time series analysis. For years, Vero has been 
very active in the GRASS GIS project, especially with documenting 
complex topics in a user friendly way, testing, development of the new 
website, coding of addons, outreach, social media and more. She 
regularly introduces GRASS GIS to new users and teaches introductory and 
advanced courses and workshops. We thank Vero for accepting this challenge!


We want to acknowledge and thank*Markus Neteler* 
for his enormous efforts and 
passionate work on pushing the GRASS GIS development for more than 20 
years. While Markus was re-elected as PSC member, he preferred to pass 
on the position of chairperson to a new PSC member. Markus is one of the 
long runners in the project, as he already started to discover the 
software in 1993 as a student. In 1998, he set up a “European GRASS 
site” at the University of Hannover, which evolved into an international 
development team. From manual source code management, he was part of the 
journey to a modern, GitHub-based development system including code 
quality testing. Markus is known to be active in conferences, code 
sprints, bug fixing, user support, infrastructure management, project 
and release management, etc. He will continue to do so!



 PSC roles & tasks

In addition to the chair role, in the firstPSC 
meeting, we have defined some 
basic areas/tasks and PSC members responsible for them:


 * Treasurer - Moritz
 * Release manager - Markus, Martin
 * Infrastructure manager - Markus
 * Translation manager - Huidae
 * Website & Marketing manager - Michael, Vero
 * Github manager - Vaclav

Of course, *everyone is invited to join and contribute*in these and 
other areas:https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/PSC/Roles 
.


/The GRASS Development Team, Feb 2021/

___
grass-dev mailing list
grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev

Re: [GRASS-dev] Should we use GitHub Discussions?

2021-02-09 Thread Moritz Lennert 

On 9/02/21 10:00, Markus Neteler wrote:

On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 5:40 AM Vaclav Petras  wrote:

On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 5:49 PM Luca Delucchi  wrote:


On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 at 08:49, massimo di stefano
 wrote:

‘’’
  I think emails (and mailing lists) are awesome, but mailing lists are 
increasingly seen as archaic and not accessible
‘’’

What about migrating our mailing list to mailman3?
The postorius interface looks modern and when integrated with hyper kitty, 
allows an easy access to the list archives (including search and post 
statistics).



I fully agree with this proposal, but this should be done at OSGeo
Level, Massimo do you want to investigate this solution with SAC?


Did anyone open a ticket for that? I didn't see it yet in case.


Or I can click on that one checkbox in GitHub settings. :-)


Not sure.
Please also note that QGIS is actually closing their GitHub
Discussions for reasons also having mentioned here.
See
https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/2021-February/009244.html



I especially like this argument:
https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/2021-February/009247.html

Moritz
___
grass-dev mailing list
grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev

Re: [GRASS-dev] Should we use GitHub Discussions?

2021-02-09 Thread Markus Neteler 
On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 5:40 AM Vaclav Petras  wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 5:49 PM Luca Delucchi  wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 at 08:49, massimo di stefano
>>  wrote:
>> > ‘’’
>> >  I think emails (and mailing lists) are awesome, but mailing lists are 
>> > increasingly seen as archaic and not accessible
>> > ‘’’
>> >
>> > What about migrating our mailing list to mailman3?
>> > The postorius interface looks modern and when integrated with hyper kitty, 
>> > allows an easy access to the list archives (including search and post 
>> > statistics).
>> >
>>
>> I fully agree with this proposal, but this should be done at OSGeo
>> Level, Massimo do you want to investigate this solution with SAC?

Did anyone open a ticket for that? I didn't see it yet in case.

> Or I can click on that one checkbox in GitHub settings. :-)

Not sure.
Please also note that QGIS is actually closing their GitHub
Discussions for reasons also having mentioned here.
See
https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/2021-February/009244.html

Markus
___
grass-dev mailing list
grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev