RE : Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGEO4W future

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE : Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGEO4W future

Fenoy Gerald
Dear all, 
Despite I agree with you that providing the OSGeo softwares in a binary distribution is a good idea, what do you think of providing something, which may be IMO even better to the end users / developpers, let's call it a build kit or a build environment already correctly setup for integration of new versions of software or even the integration of this or that new software. I really think that it make lot of sense to provide such a thing. 

This way, any new projects become able to provide a windows version (x64 or i386, I'm not sure we should provide only x64 versions even it will be the most used, but this is another question) of their software without having to do all the work on their own as so many of us did /do already.

Let suppose that you find a bug in this or that software but you get a patch provided by the OSGeo community (whatever is the project name!), then this patch can be easilly applied on the current build environment and user / devs are able to try the result directly.

Nevertheless, I understand that it is huge work, but cannot we plan to get thz work done in a similar manner than the OSGeoLiveDVD was built. Let say by asking for volonteers to handle a specific project.

It was something I spoke about here and there (conferences mainly) as a key missing thing, so I thought that as you put this discussion on table it was perfect timming to share my thoughts on this.

Waiting for your input and comments.

If this sounds totally irrealisitic please let me say that it is not.

Best regards.

Gėrald Fenoy
http://www.osgeo.org




-------- Message d'origine --------
De : Alex Mandel <[hidden email]>
Date : 20/09/2013 22:52 (GMT+00:00)
A : Tamas Szekeres <[hidden email]>,Paolo Cavallini <[hidden email]>
Cc : OSGeo Discussions <[hidden email]>,OSGeo-Board <[hidden email]>
Objet : Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] OSGEO4W future


On 09/20/2013 02:45 PM, Tamas Szekeres wrote:

> 2013/9/20 Paolo Cavallini <[hidden email]>
>
>> I suggest to make a Steering Committee
>> for OSGEO4W, so to have a clear roadmap, and give Windows (urgh!)
>> users a predictable environment. I think some of our million users
>> would be happy to support this effort, if they would know they
>> contribute actively to something they need.
>>
>
>
> Hi Paolo,
>
> I agree with you entrirely, as we've already been talking about this today.
> Being committed to provide usable binaries on Windows, you can count me in.
> Setting up a build environment (probably a version of a Windows Server x64
> edition with MSVC2010 for instance) providing to compile all the stuff at
> the same place would be a prerequisite.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Tamas
>

I'm actually already providing such an instance and was planning to
clone it to several instances as well as a testing instance.
Frank has the keys to drive it and has been using it for several months
already.

It's part of my lab's participation in the ICA-OSGeo initiative.
http://geospatial.ucdavis.edu/resources/open-source

Thanks,
Alex

_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

pcav
On 2013-09-22 00:35, Tamas Szekeres wrote:

> And so on.... (anyone is welcomed to add further experiences or
> ideas) 

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.
--
Paolo Cavallini - Faunalia
www.faunalia.eu
Full contact details at www.faunalia.eu/pc
Nuovi corsi QGIS e PostGIS: http://www.faunalia.it/calendario
_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] 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

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

pcav
-----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-----
_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

pcav
In reply to this post by pcav
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Il 22/09/2013 10:35, Tamas Szekeres ha scritto:

> I'd suggest Mateusz an Jeff should also be invited (if they have
> time). Any other who is involved in packaging Windows stuff, please
> feel free to check in as well.

I personally would welcome any interested and active party involved.
Please note that PSC is a subset of it, however. To me it makes not
much sense to have all devs in the PSC.
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/

iEYEARECAAYFAlJAWgQACgkQ/NedwLUzIr6JggCfYyFc10gWxhfxqLAYzsyInkt7
lA0An2yyGdmGOLU9dVePwtKUwkTepeRg
=cJGN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

mhw-at-yg
In reply to this post by pcav
Hi Folks,

I'm definitely on-board for an Osgeo4W invigoration cycle or reboot (my absence for the last 2 months notwithstanding). What kind of role I could play in that, well, I don't know.  If nothing else, I will cheer and encourage. :)

As for separating governance from technical... I'm unsure about that. To my experience, they're pretty much the same (or maybe I don't understand how those terms are being used). In any case, I'll work with whatever is present.

cheers,
matt wilkie
--------------------------------------------
Geomatics Analyst
Information Management and Technology
Yukon Department of Environment
10 Burns Road * Whitehorse, Yukon * Y1A 4Y9
867-667-8133 Tel * 867-393-7003 Fax
http://environmentyukon.gov.yk.ca/geomatics/
-------------------------------------------- 
On 22/09/2013 12:44 AM, Paolo Cavallini wrote:
On 2013-09-22 00:35, Tamas Szekeres wrote:
And so on.... (anyone is welcomed to add further experiences or
ideas) 
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.



_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
-Matt
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Daniel Morissette
In reply to this post by pcav
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

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Daniel Morissette
In reply to this post by pcav
On 13-09-23 11:11 AM, Paolo Cavallini wrote:
>
> I personally would welcome any interested and active party involved.
> Please note that PSC is a subset of it, however. To me it makes not
> much sense to have all devs in the PSC.

Agreed. The PSC of a project is usually composed of key participants in
the project representing a diversity of provenances and views, and
normally relatively small in comparison to the pool of committers and
other contributors of the project.

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

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

Angelos Tzotsos
In reply to this post by Daniel Morissette
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

_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

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

pcav
-----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-----
_______________________________________________
Board mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/board