Re: [Live-demo] [OSGeo] #1645: Rasdaman not installed on 32 bit system

[OSGeo]

#1645: Rasdaman not installed on 32 bit system
-+---
 Reporter:  kalxas   |   Owner:  live-demo@…
 Type:  defect   |  Status:  closed
 Priority:  major|   Milestone:  OSGeoLive9.5
Component:  LiveDVD  |  Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:   |
-+---

Comment (by kalxas):

 There is a new RC1 build for 32bit in the download servers.

--
Ticket URL: 
OSGeo 
OSGeo committee and general foundation issue tracker.
___
Live-demo mailing list
Live-demo@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/live-demo
http://live.osgeo.org
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc

Re: [Live-demo] [OSGeo] #1645: Rasdaman not installed on 32 bit system

[OSGeo]

#1645: Rasdaman not installed on 32 bit system
-+---
 Reporter:  kalxas   |   Owner:  live-demo@…
 Type:  defect   |  Status:  closed
 Priority:  major|   Milestone:  OSGeoLive9.5
Component:  LiveDVD  |  Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:   |
-+---
Changes (by kalxas):

 * status:  new => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed


Comment:

 This has been fixed.

 Will build another 32bit RC.

--
Ticket URL: 
OSGeo 
OSGeo committee and general foundation issue tracker.
___
Live-demo mailing list
Live-demo@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/live-demo
http://live.osgeo.org
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc

Re: [Live-demo] Questioning GSoC 2015 Notebook mentorship

[Cameron Shorter]

On 15/03/2016 8:34 pm, massimo di stefano wrote:
I’m sorry but in my understanding this should have been part of a 
mentor's responsibility during my gsoc.
I had a very good experience with the other 2 mentors who have don a 
great job in reviewing and addressing the technical part of my GSoC.
I should remind you that according with pre-GSoC discussion your rule 
was to contribute in the non-technical aspects of the project.


Massimo,
I feel quite offended and a bit betrayed by your implication that I 
provided sub-optimal GSoC mentorship.
I provided much feedback in helping you refine your proposal, read all 
reports once started, provided feedback and suggested improvements, 
including suggesting template development for others can build on.
But possibly part of the reason I'm offended is that you have struck a 
nerve. I would have really liked to have seen more done in the quality 
of the documentation produced, and indeed that is something that I could 
have tackled myself. I underestimated how much time I'd have to dedicate 
to such a task vs effort required.


Of note, GSoC sponsors coding, not documentation of coding.
Massimo, you certainly passed the programming side of the GSoC project. 
However, to meet OSGeo-Live's existing quality standards, we need review 
of Notebook docs. And I personally haven't kept up, and we haven't 
attracted any other volunteers to review Notebook docs.


So Massimo, I apologise if you feel I let you down as a GSoC mentor in 
2015.


Margherita asked me off list about my personal capacity to dedicate 
enough time to future GSoC mentoring. It is an appropriate question.
To be fair to future OSGeo-Live GSoC participants, I should be clear 
that the level of doc review I can provide will be limited. I'll be able 
to review a template or two, and provide general guidance, however we 
will require further  reviewers if we are going to be able to maintain 
OSGeo-Live's documentation quality for all Notebooks produced.


This makes me question whether we, the OSGeo-Live community, are ready 
to accept GSoC Notebook programmers for OSGeo-Live, until existing 
Notebook documents are reviewed.




--
Cameron Shorter,
Software and Data Solutions Manager
LISAsoft
Suite 112, Jones Bay Wharf,
26 - 32 Pirrama Rd, Pyrmont NSW 2009

P +61 2 9009 5000,  W www.lisasoft.com,  F +61 2 9009 5099

___
Live-demo mailing list
Live-demo@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/live-demo
http://live.osgeo.org
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc

Re: [Live-demo] [OSGeo] #1645: Rasdaman not installed on 32 bit system

[OSGeo]

#1645: Rasdaman not installed on 32 bit system
-+---
 Reporter:  kalxas   |   Owner:  live-demo@…
 Type:  defect   |  Status:  new
 Priority:  major|   Milestone:  OSGeoLive9.5
Component:  LiveDVD  |  Resolution:
 Keywords:   |
-+---
Changes (by kalxas):

 * priority:  blocker => major


Comment:

 Thanks Alex for the fast fix.

 Rasdaman is now installed on 32 bit nightly.

 We are now trying to fix a PermGem Java allocation issue in tomcat7

 Also, ncwms is ok too.

--
Ticket URL: 
OSGeo 
OSGeo committee and general foundation issue tracker.
___
Live-demo mailing list
Live-demo@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/live-demo
http://live.osgeo.org
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc

Re: [Live-demo] Notebook-review

[massimo di stefano]

Cameron,

this efforts is to ensure the work done for the GSoC-2015 will receive a proper 
review as it didn’t get the required attention during the GSoC period. 
That’s the objective of the wiki page on the relative github repository.

It is obvious that notebooks as well as any other contribution to the live, 
needs guidelines and rules. 
in my previous mail I addressed some of them in the section:

contributing new notebooks to the live
https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/live-demo/2016-March/011010.html 



Of course the OSGeo wiki is the right place for those guidelines.

Note: 
Notebook guidelines is a separate task from the GSoC notebook review, where 
those guidelines are (and will) respected.

I started to add information here:

https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Add_Project#Notebooks 


feel free to move them on a temporary page if you prefer. We can make it public 
when ready.


> On Mar 14, 2016, at 9:28 PM, Cameron Shorter  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Massimo,
> I also agree that a review process is in order. I'd actually extend to 
> suggest that a development process should be described as well, and that we 
> should align with existing OSGeo-Live documentation processes.
> 
> Ie, we should be able to find Notebook processes linked from here:
> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc#Documentation 
> 
> I also think that we should describe the processes in the OSGeo-Live wiki 
> (which uses media wiki) rather than a git wiki. This is to ensure consistency 
> with the rest of OSGeo-Live. Although I'm open to being convinced otherwise 
> if there are strong advantages to using a git wiki.
> 
> I'd suggest following a similar style to the Quickstart guide:
> https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Add_Project#Application_Quick_Start 
> 
> For example, create a template Notebook, with comments, that someone else can 
> follow to create a new Quickstart.

we can agree in having a template system for heading and footer of each 
notebook, have a look at the header in the GSoC notebooks where the first cell 
is a markdown cell which help the user to navigate the notebook server 
filesystem 

(NOTE: you need to run the notebook in order to see it)

> 
> I see our weak point from an OSGeo-Live project's point of view is sourcing a 
> person or people willing to provide detailed review of the Notebooks.
> In particular, it is a significant time sink reviewing documentation to 
> ensure it has well formed, concise English, at the standard of a technical 
> text book. (This is the standard we have been targeting so far, and I believe 
> Notebooks should also be required to meet this standard).
> I'd guess that about 60% of time of creating a good notebook would be in 
> writing code, 40% in describing it.
> 
> Massimo, for context, your docs are quite good, but I'd estimate that they 
> would be ~ 10% to 20% of your effort would be required to review the docs to 
> our current standards. Reviewing the English in your Quickstart took me 3 to 
> 4 hours, and that didn't include running any of the steps.
> 
> Sourcing someone with good English writing skills to write Notebooks will 
> help the review process a lot.

I’m sorry but in my understanding this should have been part of a mentor's 
responsibility during my gsoc.
I had a very good experience with the other 2 mentors who have don a great job 
in reviewing and addressing the technical part of my GSoC. 
I should remind you that according with pre-GSoC discussion your rule was to 
contribute in the non-technical aspects of the project.

> 
> Cheers, Cameron
> 
> On 15/03/2016 5:08 am, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
>> Hi Massimo,
>> 
>> I agree that we need a review process for all notebooks (not just GSoC).
>> 
>> +1
>> Angelos
>> 
>> On 03/14/2016 01:11 AM, massimo di stefano wrote:
>>> From the discussion we had so far it is clear to me we need a *official 
>>> revision procedure* to have the work done for the GSoC integrated into the 
>>> live.
>>> 
>>> I agreed in “hiding”  the jupyter notebook, and so the GSoC work, from this 
>>> release of the Live,
>>> in favor of a transparent public commitment to review the efforts done.
>>> 
>>> IMHO the spreadsheet approach we use for project review doesn’t apply very 
>>> well in this context.
>>> To facilitate keeping track of the review and facilitate potential new 
>>> contributors,
>>> I propose to open a motion in accepting the use of github checklist+issue 
>>> tracker to keep track of the review process.
>>> 
>>> I started this page, which should help in making this possible:
>>> 
>>> https://github.com/epifanio/OSGeoLive-Notebooks/wiki/Notebook-review 
>>>  
>>>