Il giorno ven, 29/04/2011 alle 10.45 +0200, Soeren Gebbert ha scritto: > IMHO installing a WPS server with different back-ends is no magic. The > web server, the WPS server and the back-ends can be bundled and > installed as easy as QGIS with all its plugins and libraries and third > party dependencies. This is technically no problem and IMHO the > 52North guys are able to provide such an out of the box solution.
Isn't it 52north in java? This will introduce a dependency on java that is IMHO unacceptable for QGIS. > You will still need wrapper for each software you want to integrate to > wrap there interface into the abstract QGIS process framework. So the > design of a really powerful abstract process framework providing > interaction and stuff is a lot of work and needs plenty of knowledge > about all the software which might be integrated as processes in QGIS. I do not agree: wrapping GRASS and GdalTools was a fast and effective process IMHO. > My main concern is the manpower which is needed to implement AND > maintain such a framework as well as the wrapper and binding for other > software packages. For example the GRASS GIS integration in QGIS. If > there is nobody in the GRASS GIS or QGIS community who is willingly to > take responsibility and time to maintain, update and extend it, it > will be unusable in the future or it will depend on an obsolete or > buggy GRASS GIS version. This is true,and will be true regardless of the kind of implementation we will choose. My idea is that moving as much as possible to a common analytical framework we'll be able to join forces in a more effective way. > I am absolutely not against a cool abstract process framework in QGIS, > but i would like to bring some IMHO important considerations into > discussion. Yes, we all appreciate that. Very interesting discussion. All the best. -- Paolo Cavallini: http://www.faunalia.it/pc _______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
