Hi ! I agree with those saying it's better to integrate the features of top-plugin in the core, if we find the features are worth it, and if someone has the time to do so, rather than shipping dozens of preinstalled plugin.
I don't like the impression it gives to have a brand new software already "bloated" by plugins, which you never really know what they do and if it's OK or not to remove them. A better alternative IMO is to display the "featured" plugins category as a tab in the plugin manager, but not to preinstall them. It could even become the default page of the plugin manager. I personally feel much better when adding by myself suggested plugins than when hesitating to remove a plugin which I'm not really sure what it's about but seems kinda-important since it already was installed... About this, please consider this ticket also : http://hub.qgis.org/issues/9405 Cheers ! Olivier 2014-04-07 19:41 GMT+02:00 Etienne Tourigny <[email protected]>: > Thanks for the links. Most of this information is also available at [1]. > > I am preparing a simple plugin to load these layers as raster layers, > will keep you updated on this. > > [1] http://www.gdal.org/frmt_wms.html > > > > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 2:32 PM, kimaidou <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi List >> >> For the record, here is an old blog post about using gdal driver to >> use external layers such as OSM >> >> http://www.3liz.com/blog/rldhont/index.php?post/2012/07/17/OpenStreetMap-Tiles-in-QGIS >> >> The problem is that with this method, it seems GDAL does not alway use >> the right tiles for the rigth scale. There must be an additionnal >> parameter wich can control this behaviour. >> >> I totally agree with the concerns about licence violation. Easing the >> use of Google layers is kind of encouraging people to use it, for >> example for digitization purpose. Users must be warned about the terms >> of service. >> >> Michael >> >> PS : someone has gathered a list of XML for GDAL for some providers : >> >> http://libreavous.teledetection.fr/geomatique/28-sig/58-afficher-des-couches-issues-de-services-en-ligne-dans-un-sig >> >> Click on the button called "Fichiers de configuration ...." >> Michael >> >> 2014-04-07 16:48 UTC+02:00, Etienne Tourigny <[email protected]>: >> >> > Since the OpenLayers plugin does not (currently) work with master, >> perhaps >> > we can replace it with TMS-based layers, either through a plugin or as a >> > native (GDAL-based) provider? >> > >> > Is there anything in OpenLayers plugin that could not work with GDAL TMS >> > mini-driver [1] ? >> > >> > [1] http://www.gdal.org/frmt_wms.html >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Etienne Tourigny >> > <[email protected]>wrote: >> > >> >> Since the OpenLayers plugin does not (currently) work with master, >> >> perhaps >> >> we can replace it with TMS-based layers, wither through a plugin or as >> a >> >> native (GDAL-based) provider? >> >> >> >> Is there anything in OpenLayers that could not work with GDAL TMS >> >> mini-driver [1] ? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 7:22 AM, Vincent Picavet >> >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >> >> >>> Hello, >> >>> >> >>> Le lundi 7 avril 2014 12:05:05, Nyall Dawson a écrit : >> >>> > On 7 April 2014 18:15, Vincent Picavet <[email protected]> >> >>> > wrote: >> >>> > > A good solution though would be to remove google layers and only >> use >> >>> OSM >> >>> > > and mapbox layers, which begin to be on par in terms of quality. >> >>> > >> >>> > I'm pretty sure this is against MapBox's terms of service too, >> unless >> >>> > users were made to sign up for a MapBox account and had to add their >> >>> > individual API key to QGIS to unlock MapBox layers: >> >>> > "You must have a Mapbox account to use Mapbox. You are required to >> >>> > register for an account before using the Service. Each request to >> the >> >>> > API must include your account's unique API identifier. Unauthorized >> >>> > use of any API identifier is prohibited." [1] >> >>> >> >>> Right, I had not read this through. It would probably be much easier >> to >> >>> get a >> >>> specific authorization from MapBox than from Google though, given >> their >> >>> open- >> >>> source orientation. >> >>> >> >>> > > Or let the user a >> >>> > > deliberate way to add google layers (indicating a URL or something >> >>> like >> >>> > > this), warning him about the licence. >> >>> > >> >>> > Hmm... while this may be a workable solution to the licensing issue, >> >>> > wouldn't it be a step back in functionality anyway? We'd be trading >> >>> > having a good, working off-the-shelf third-party plugin for a >> crippled >> >>> > core version which takes user intervention to unlock the same >> >>> > features. >> >>> >> >>> In any case, there are quite a lot of OSM based layers which can be >> used >> >>> (HOT, >> >>> OSM.fr, OpenCycleMap...). We can still enhance the plugin with those. >> >>> It would lack an aerial imagery layer though. >> >>> >> >>> > I'm totally for adding essential plugins to core (or merging the >> >>> > functionality with reimplemented c++ versions), but I honestly don't >> >>> > know if it's workable to do this for the OpenLayers plugin. >> >>> >> >>> Right, if we remove everything from the plugin except the TMS YXZ >> >>> layers, >> >>> we >> >>> could also just have a better ergonomy for opening this kind of layers >> >>> through >> >>> GDAL, and have a predefined list of layers accessible on internet >> (even >> >>> auto- >> >>> updatable by downloading the list). >> >>> >> >>> Vincent >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Qgis-developer mailing list >> >>> [email protected] >> >>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Qgis-developer mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >
_______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
