(cross-posted on otb-developers and otb-users) Hello all,
OTB does not have any packages officially supported by any linux distro. This old story roots back to days where there are lot of embedded sources inside otb for every dependency it uses. Now they are cleaned up with an expcetion for 6S and SIftFast. what should we do about packaging task in OTB ? Our current strategy is to get the packages ready after release. That is the time revisit the packaging task. To get it ready too fast by we push packages into ubunutgis. The thing is it is easy to push into ubuntugis ppa rather than going for a review. On the plus side, OTB has packages soon after release and our users are happy. We don't stop just with OTB. We do ossim, itk and if possible we try to add some libsvm, muparserx. IMHO, This is the wrong way. we must stop this and look at the big picture. Get the packaging work into DebianGIS. To have it in official it is more difficult and takes time. But remember you don't have to go through this with each and every release. Packaging are updated when Debian/Ubuntu or Fedora has a new release. This is the way other things work. but OTB updates its packages for every release. Shouldn't it be the other way round. Why should we do a package with every release ? Why is it necessary?. If there is an official packages in debian and then in ubuntu, then we don't need to do this. right? ITK does not do this. But in Fedora 23, I have ITK 4.8.2 ? We should try adopt this. For users, if they want OTB the next day of release they could build OTB on their own. Before saying anything.. building is not that hard since 5.0. We can all agree on that. A minimal build needs less than 10 mins. Is that too much for any user wiating to get the newly added features and performance improvements ? This can be time I need to install libotb-dev on a fresh ubuntu or debian ? Also there is a nightly packages for Linux, Windows and OSX. Even so we feel important to make deb, rpm and maybe something else (I don't know all distribution) for every OTB. One more point I would like to add to this long mail is going the wrong way for packaging always gives users a bad impression. And that feedback may not even reach our mailinglist before they give up on OTB. Because we have packaging for "N" distribtions and their "M" versions something will be surely broken somewhere. And history suggests that it is true. Thanks all for your patience to read till end of this mail. I appreciate your feedback/comments/suggestions. -- Regards, Rashad -- -- Check the OTB FAQ at http://www.orfeo-toolbox.org/FAQ.html You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "otb-users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/otb-users?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "otb-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
