Re: [QGIS-Developer] Future of OTB provider plugin?
+1 Le 13/11/2023 à 09:37, Jürgen E. Fischer via QGIS-Developer a écrit : Hi Alex, On Mon, 13. Nov 2023 at 09:00:34 +0200, Alexander Bruy via QGIS-Developer wrote: Just to remind that most of the Processing developers were against its inclusion in the core back in 2018 and predicted that it won't be maintained and eventually will be removed. Honestly I wasn't even aware that it was still there and I don't recall any complaints that it was not working (or that OTB was removed/missing in OSGeo4W or Debian, which is probably why nobody noticed, if it doesn't). Jürgen ___ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer ___ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [QGIS-Developer] Future of OTB provider plugin?
On Mon, 13 Nov 2023, 6:28 pm Julien Cabieces via QGIS-Developer, < qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > +1 for me too, I think it would ease development of the plugin and would > lower the pain of managing compatibility between QGIS and OTB. > > I opened an issue on their GitLab platform to raise awareness of this > proposal https://gitlab.orfeo-toolbox.org/orfeotoolbox/otb/-/issues/2365 Thanks Julien! Would you be interested in potentially adopting the community plugin? Nyall > > Regards, > Julien > > > > > Hi > > > > +1 from me too. > > > > Regards > > > > Tim > > > > On Sun, Nov 12, 2023 at 9:46 PM Jürgen E. Fischer via QGIS-Developer < > qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > > > > Hi Nyall, > > > > On Mon, 13. Nov 2023 at 07:38:49 +1000, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer > wrote: > > > So... what does everyone else think? Can we safely demote OTB to a 3rd > > > party plugin and remove it for QGIS 3.36? > > > > +1 > > > > Jürgen > > > > -- > > Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. > +49-4931-918175-31 > > Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstraße 13 Fax. > +49-4931-918175-50 > > Software Engineer D-26506 Norden > https://www.norbit.de > > QGIS release manager (PSC) Germany IRC: jef on > Libera|OFTC > > ___ > > QGIS-Developer mailing list > > QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org > > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > > > -- > > Julien Cabieces > Senior Developer at Oslandia > julien.cabie...@oslandia.com > ___ > QGIS-Developer mailing list > QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > ___ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [QGIS-Developer] Future of OTB provider plugin?
Hi Alex, On Mon, 13. Nov 2023 at 09:00:34 +0200, Alexander Bruy via QGIS-Developer wrote: > Just to remind that most of the Processing developers were against its > inclusion in the core back in 2018 and predicted that it won't be maintained > and eventually will be removed. Honestly I wasn't even aware that it was still there and I don't recall any complaints that it was not working (or that OTB was removed/missing in OSGeo4W or Debian, which is probably why nobody noticed, if it doesn't). Jürgen -- Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-31 Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstraße 13 Fax. +49-4931-918175-50 Software Engineer D-26506 Nordenhttps://www.norbit.de QGIS release manager (PSC) Germany IRC: jef on Libera|OFTC signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [QGIS-Developer] Future of OTB provider plugin?
Hi, +1 for me too, I think it would ease development of the plugin and would lower the pain of managing compatibility between QGIS and OTB. I opened an issue on their GitLab platform to raise awareness of this proposal https://gitlab.orfeo-toolbox.org/orfeotoolbox/otb/-/issues/2365 Regards, Julien > Hi > > +1 from me too. > > Regards > > Tim > > On Sun, Nov 12, 2023 at 9:46 PM Jürgen E. Fischer via QGIS-Developer > wrote: > > Hi Nyall, > > On Mon, 13. Nov 2023 at 07:38:49 +1000, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer > wrote: > > So... what does everyone else think? Can we safely demote OTB to a 3rd > > party plugin and remove it for QGIS 3.36? > > +1 > > Jürgen > > -- > Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-31 > Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstraße 13 Fax. +49-4931-918175-50 > Software Engineer D-26506 Nordenhttps://www.norbit.de > QGIS release manager (PSC) Germany IRC: jef on Libera|OFTC > ___ > QGIS-Developer mailing list > QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer -- Julien Cabieces Senior Developer at Oslandia julien.cabie...@oslandia.com ___ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [QGIS-Developer] Future of OTB provider plugin?
+1 Matthias On Sun, Nov 12, 2023 at 10:39 PM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > Hi list, > > I'd like to kick start some discussions about the future of the official > OTB Processing Provider plugin which comes pre-installed with QGIS. > > As you may or may not be aware of, the Processing maintainers have been on > a multi-year quest to slim down the core set of out-of-the-box providers. > The biggest consequences of these have been the demotion of the Processing > R Providers and SAGA providers to 3rd party, community maintained plugins. > > The main motivations behind this are: > > - Making sure that all the out of the box tools "just work" consistently > across different platforms, without requiring users to install additional > software. > - Easing the maintenance burden on the core QGIS team -- by moving these > plugins to community maintained repositories, we lower the barrier of entry > for contributors to these plugins. > - Avoiding issues with "tight coupling" of 3rd party tools to QGIS > versions. This was especially the case with the SAGA provider, where it > proved impossible to keep a stable plugin which worked consistently across > the range of SAGA versions installable on different platforms. (The 3rd > party SAGA NG plugin avoids this by ALWAYS targeting the most recent SAGA > version, and leaving it as the user's responsibility for installing this > version. We didn't have the same flexibility when the SAGA provider was a > core part of QGIS). > > I'd like to now focus on the out-of-the-box OTB Processing provider, and > personally I would like to see this one demoted to a community maintained > plugin. > > My reasons are: > 1. The provider has not seen development efforts outside of "keep this > running only" by the usual QGIS committers. I would hope to see the same > results as we saw with the R and SAGA plugins where moving to community > maintained plugins increases the number of outside contributions. > 2. OTB requires a separate installation outside of QGIS, and isn't easily > available on many supported QGIS platforms (eg there's no Fedora package). > 3. The OTB installer does some weird thing in the QGIS ci environment, > which make me nervous: > > 2023-11-12T12:54:48.9064680Z #26 18.57 warning: working around a Linux kernel > bug by creating a hole of 20480 bytes in ‘./lib/libQt5Core.so.5.10.1’ > > So... what does everyone else think? Can we safely demote OTB to a 3rd > party plugin and remove it for QGIS 3.36? > > Nyall > ___ > QGIS-Developer mailing list > QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > ___ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [QGIS-Developer] Future of OTB provider plugin?
Just to remind that most of the Processing developers were against its inclusion in the core back in 2018 and predicted that it won't be maintained and eventually will be removed. Said that, a huge +1 from me. нд, 12 лист. 2023 р. о 23:38 Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer пише: > > Hi list, > > I'd like to kick start some discussions about the future of the official OTB > Processing Provider plugin which comes pre-installed with QGIS. > > As you may or may not be aware of, the Processing maintainers have been on a > multi-year quest to slim down the core set of out-of-the-box providers. The > biggest consequences of these have been the demotion of the Processing R > Providers and SAGA providers to 3rd party, community maintained plugins. > > The main motivations behind this are: > > - Making sure that all the out of the box tools "just work" consistently > across different platforms, without requiring users to install additional > software. > - Easing the maintenance burden on the core QGIS team -- by moving these > plugins to community maintained repositories, we lower the barrier of entry > for contributors to these plugins. > - Avoiding issues with "tight coupling" of 3rd party tools to QGIS versions. > This was especially the case with the SAGA provider, where it proved > impossible to keep a stable plugin which worked consistently across the range > of SAGA versions installable on different platforms. (The 3rd party SAGA NG > plugin avoids this by ALWAYS targeting the most recent SAGA version, and > leaving it as the user's responsibility for installing this version. We > didn't have the same flexibility when the SAGA provider was a core part of > QGIS). > > I'd like to now focus on the out-of-the-box OTB Processing provider, and > personally I would like to see this one demoted to a community maintained > plugin. > > My reasons are: > 1. The provider has not seen development efforts outside of "keep this > running only" by the usual QGIS committers. I would hope to see the same > results as we saw with the R and SAGA plugins where moving to community > maintained plugins increases the number of outside contributions. > 2. OTB requires a separate installation outside of QGIS, and isn't easily > available on many supported QGIS platforms (eg there's no Fedora package). > 3. The OTB installer does some weird thing in the QGIS ci environment, which > make me nervous: > > 2023-11-12T12:54:48.9064680Z #26 18.57 warning: working around a Linux kernel > bug by creating a hole of 20480 bytes in ‘./lib/libQt5Core.so.5.10.1’ > > So... what does everyone else think? Can we safely demote OTB to a 3rd party > plugin and remove it for QGIS 3.36? > > Nyall > ___ > QGIS-Developer mailing list > QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer -- Alexander Bruy ___ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [QGIS-Developer] Future of OTB provider plugin?
Hi +1 from me too. Regards Tim On Sun, Nov 12, 2023 at 9:46 PM Jürgen E. Fischer via QGIS-Developer < qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org> wrote: > Hi Nyall, > > On Mon, 13. Nov 2023 at 07:38:49 +1000, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer > wrote: > > So... what does everyone else think? Can we safely demote OTB to a 3rd > > party plugin and remove it for QGIS 3.36? > > +1 > > > Jürgen > > -- > Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-31 > Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstraße 13 Fax. +49-4931-918175-50 > Software Engineer D-26506 Norden > https://www.norbit.de > QGIS release manager (PSC) Germany IRC: jef on Libera|OFTC > ___ > QGIS-Developer mailing list > QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > -- -- Tim Sutton Kartoza Co-Founder Visit http://kartoza.com to find out about open source: * Desktop GIS programming services * Geospatial web development * GIS Training * Consulting Services Tim is a member of the QGIS Project Steering Committee --- ___ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Re: [QGIS-Developer] Future of OTB provider plugin?
Hi Nyall, On Mon, 13. Nov 2023 at 07:38:49 +1000, Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer wrote: > So... what does everyone else think? Can we safely demote OTB to a 3rd > party plugin and remove it for QGIS 3.36? +1 Jürgen -- Jürgen E. Fischer norBIT GmbH Tel. +49-4931-918175-31 Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Rheinstraße 13 Fax. +49-4931-918175-50 Software Engineer D-26506 Nordenhttps://www.norbit.de QGIS release manager (PSC) Germany IRC: jef on Libera|OFTC signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
[QGIS-Developer] Future of OTB provider plugin?
Hi list, I'd like to kick start some discussions about the future of the official OTB Processing Provider plugin which comes pre-installed with QGIS. As you may or may not be aware of, the Processing maintainers have been on a multi-year quest to slim down the core set of out-of-the-box providers. The biggest consequences of these have been the demotion of the Processing R Providers and SAGA providers to 3rd party, community maintained plugins. The main motivations behind this are: - Making sure that all the out of the box tools "just work" consistently across different platforms, without requiring users to install additional software. - Easing the maintenance burden on the core QGIS team -- by moving these plugins to community maintained repositories, we lower the barrier of entry for contributors to these plugins. - Avoiding issues with "tight coupling" of 3rd party tools to QGIS versions. This was especially the case with the SAGA provider, where it proved impossible to keep a stable plugin which worked consistently across the range of SAGA versions installable on different platforms. (The 3rd party SAGA NG plugin avoids this by ALWAYS targeting the most recent SAGA version, and leaving it as the user's responsibility for installing this version. We didn't have the same flexibility when the SAGA provider was a core part of QGIS). I'd like to now focus on the out-of-the-box OTB Processing provider, and personally I would like to see this one demoted to a community maintained plugin. My reasons are: 1. The provider has not seen development efforts outside of "keep this running only" by the usual QGIS committers. I would hope to see the same results as we saw with the R and SAGA plugins where moving to community maintained plugins increases the number of outside contributions. 2. OTB requires a separate installation outside of QGIS, and isn't easily available on many supported QGIS platforms (eg there's no Fedora package). 3. The OTB installer does some weird thing in the QGIS ci environment, which make me nervous: 2023-11-12T12:54:48.9064680Z #26 18.57 warning: working around a Linux kernel bug by creating a hole of 20480 bytes in ‘./lib/libQt5Core.so.5.10.1’ So... what does everyone else think? Can we safely demote OTB to a 3rd party plugin and remove it for QGIS 3.36? Nyall ___ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
