Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Anita Graser]

Hi Agus,

You can get Sextante 1.0.8. It works well with QGIS 1.8. I've been using  
it for months now.
Only issue is that it has to be installed manually because Plugin  
Installer always fetches 1.0.9.


Anita


Am 18.04.2013, 18:45 Uhr, schrieb Agustin Lobo :


Victor,
I know this is about >= 1.9, that's is the point:
I want to stress the contradiction about asking for feedback while
the tools cannot be tested on the stable version that most users use.
Qgis has an extraordinary feature:
users can test experimental tools developed as plugins while keeping the
stable core. If Sextante were working on the stable release, (either
by making sextante work
on 1.8, which is probably not possible, or by having released an
stable 1.9 ) you
would be having a lot more of feedback from users.

 Agus


On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Victor Olaya  wrote:

Agustin

SEXTANTE now only works on 1.9 (to become 2.0 soon...), but all this
discussion is about tools in versions  >= 2.0. So those users that
work with the stable version will have SEXTANTE in their stable 2.0

I agree with the need of that c++ conversion. Once that is ready,
wrapping from SEXTANTE is trivial.

Cheers
Victor

2013/4/18 Werner Macho :

hi!

If I remember correct Carson Farmer startet to bring the algorithms  
into a

cpp library (which would be a good and fast choice i think)
I'd welcome having fast and reliable algorithms in cpp .. So I agree  
with

Agustin - very welcome work..

regards
Werner



On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Agustin Lobo   
wrote:


I would add that this conversion of key tools from python to c++
should be a priority in qgis developement. Many
critical operations fail or never end in real life (size beyond  
limits of

demo
datasets)  cases of study. Thus Vinayan work would be greatly  
welcomed by

users.
Agus


On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Alexander Bruy
 wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 10:08:56 -0700 (PDT)
> vinayan  wrote:
>
>> I think it is best to have maximum algorithms available in c++  
ap,  in

>> the
>> analysis module(i see that some are already available)..I would be
>> willing
>> to contribute to it if required
>
> All fTools functions are in Python. C++ implementation in analysis
> lib needs review and maybe some refactoring to support selected
> features and memory layers.
>
> --
> Alexander Bruy
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer




___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer


___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Agustin Lobo]

Victor,
I know this is about >= 1.9, that's is the point:
I want to stress the contradiction about asking for feedback while
the tools cannot be tested on the stable version that most users use.
Qgis has an extraordinary feature:
users can test experimental tools developed as plugins while keeping the
stable core. If Sextante were working on the stable release, (either
by making sextante work
on 1.8, which is probably not possible, or by having released an
stable 1.9 ) you
would be having a lot more of feedback from users.

 Agus


On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Victor Olaya  wrote:
> Agustin
>
> SEXTANTE now only works on 1.9 (to become 2.0 soon...), but all this
> discussion is about tools in versions  >= 2.0. So those users that
> work with the stable version will have SEXTANTE in their stable 2.0
>
> I agree with the need of that c++ conversion. Once that is ready,
> wrapping from SEXTANTE is trivial.
>
> Cheers
> Victor
>
> 2013/4/18 Werner Macho :
>> hi!
>>
>> If I remember correct Carson Farmer startet to bring the algorithms into a
>> cpp library (which would be a good and fast choice i think)
>> I'd welcome having fast and reliable algorithms in cpp .. So I agree with
>> Agustin - very welcome work..
>>
>> regards
>> Werner
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Agustin Lobo  wrote:
>>>
>>> I would add that this conversion of key tools from python to c++
>>> should be a priority in qgis developement. Many
>>> critical operations fail or never end in real life (size beyond limits of
>>> demo
>>> datasets)  cases of study. Thus Vinayan work would be greatly welcomed by
>>> users.
>>> Agus
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Alexander Bruy
>>>  wrote:
>>> > On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 10:08:56 -0700 (PDT)
>>> > vinayan  wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> I think it is best to have maximum algorithms available in c++ ap,  in
>>> >> the
>>> >> analysis module(i see that some are already available)..I would be
>>> >> willing
>>> >> to contribute to it if required
>>> >
>>> > All fTools functions are in Python. C++ implementation in analysis
>>> > lib needs review and maybe some refactoring to support selected
>>> > features and memory layers.
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Alexander Bruy
>>> > ___
>>> > Qgis-developer mailing list
>>> > Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
>>> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>> ___
>>> Qgis-developer mailing list
>>> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Qgis-developer mailing list
>> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>>
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Victor Olaya]

That was my thought...but for some reasons some operations are very
slow from the fTools code, even if they use indexing. I have a couple
of examples with points in polygon calculation, that take ages in
fTools (or the same SEXTANTE algorithm, which has the same code), and
they shouldn't. Maybe the Python call to create a spatial index is not
working properly and it actually does nothing... ¿?¿?

I haven't spent too much time on this anyway, so it's true that
improving those algorithms might be possible and probably in some
cases not hard. I do not remember much about all ftools algorithms,
but for instance, those in the MMQGIS plugin were in many cases very
naive (and thus, unusable for large layers). I put them into SEXTANTE
as they were, but it's true that some extra work should be done on
that, at least with the most used algoirthms

Regards
Victor


2013/4/18 Martin Dobias :
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Werner Macho  wrote:
>> hi!
>>
>> If I remember correct Carson Farmer startet to bring the algorithms into a
>> cpp library (which would be a good and fast choice i think)
>> I'd welcome having fast and reliable algorithms in cpp .. So I agree with
>> Agustin - very welcome work..
>
> Let me add that plain re-writing from Python to c++ may _not_ bring a
> great speed improvement. Often it is more important to change the
> algorithm - e.g. to use a spatial index where possible.
>
> Martin
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Martin Dobias]

On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Werner Macho  wrote:
> hi!
>
> If I remember correct Carson Farmer startet to bring the algorithms into a
> cpp library (which would be a good and fast choice i think)
> I'd welcome having fast and reliable algorithms in cpp .. So I agree with
> Agustin - very welcome work..

Let me add that plain re-writing from Python to c++ may _not_ bring a
great speed improvement. Often it is more important to change the
algorithm - e.g. to use a spatial index where possible.

Martin
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Victor Olaya]

Agustin

SEXTANTE now only works on 1.9 (to become 2.0 soon...), but all this
discussion is about tools in versions  >= 2.0. So those users that
work with the stable version will have SEXTANTE in their stable 2.0

I agree with the need of that c++ conversion. Once that is ready,
wrapping from SEXTANTE is trivial.

Cheers
Victor

2013/4/18 Werner Macho :
> hi!
>
> If I remember correct Carson Farmer startet to bring the algorithms into a
> cpp library (which would be a good and fast choice i think)
> I'd welcome having fast and reliable algorithms in cpp .. So I agree with
> Agustin - very welcome work..
>
> regards
> Werner
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Agustin Lobo  wrote:
>>
>> I would add that this conversion of key tools from python to c++
>> should be a priority in qgis developement. Many
>> critical operations fail or never end in real life (size beyond limits of
>> demo
>> datasets)  cases of study. Thus Vinayan work would be greatly welcomed by
>> users.
>> Agus
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Alexander Bruy
>>  wrote:
>> > On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 10:08:56 -0700 (PDT)
>> > vinayan  wrote:
>> >
>> >> I think it is best to have maximum algorithms available in c++ ap,  in
>> >> the
>> >> analysis module(i see that some are already available)..I would be
>> >> willing
>> >> to contribute to it if required
>> >
>> > All fTools functions are in Python. C++ implementation in analysis
>> > lib needs review and maybe some refactoring to support selected
>> > features and memory layers.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Alexander Bruy
>> > ___
>> > Qgis-developer mailing list
>> > Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
>> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>> ___
>> Qgis-developer mailing list
>> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>
>
>
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Werner Macho]

hi!

If I remember correct Carson Farmer startet to bring the algorithms into a
cpp library (which would be a good and fast choice i think)
I'd welcome having fast and reliable algorithms in cpp .. So I agree with
Agustin - very welcome work..

regards
Werner



On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Agustin Lobo  wrote:

> I would add that this conversion of key tools from python to c++
> should be a priority in qgis developement. Many
> critical operations fail or never end in real life (size beyond limits of
> demo
> datasets)  cases of study. Thus Vinayan work would be greatly welcomed by
> users.
> Agus
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Alexander Bruy
>  wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 10:08:56 -0700 (PDT)
> > vinayan  wrote:
> >
> >> I think it is best to have maximum algorithms available in c++ ap,  in
> the
> >> analysis module(i see that some are already available)..I would be
> willing
> >> to contribute to it if required
> >
> > All fTools functions are in Python. C++ implementation in analysis
> > lib needs review and maybe some refactoring to support selected
> > features and memory layers.
> >
> > --
> > Alexander Bruy
> > ___
> > Qgis-developer mailing list
> > Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Agustin Lobo]

I would add that this conversion of key tools from python to c++
should be a priority in qgis developement. Many
critical operations fail or never end in real life (size beyond limits of demo
datasets)  cases of study. Thus Vinayan work would be greatly welcomed by users.
Agus


On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Alexander Bruy
 wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 10:08:56 -0700 (PDT)
> vinayan  wrote:
>
>> I think it is best to have maximum algorithms available in c++ ap,  in the
>> analysis module(i see that some are already available)..I would be willing
>> to contribute to it if required
>
> All fTools functions are in Python. C++ implementation in analysis
> lib needs review and maybe some refactoring to support selected
> features and memory layers.
>
> --
> Alexander Bruy
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Agustin Lobo]

Victor,

Maybe I'm wrong but I think that Sextante does not work on qgis 1.8, right?
Note that, in such a case, feedback from users will be limited as most
users work with the stable release.
I have a 1.9 version on the little Mac and test from time to time.

Agus

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Victor Olaya  wrote:
> Bernard's problem was related with using non-file layers in the
> modeler. It was a very easy fix, so please, everyone that's using
> SEXTANTE, share your problems so we can work on them and make the
> software more stable. :-)
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> 2013/4/17 Bernhard Ströbl :
>> Hi all,
>>
>> just want to inform you that Victor was able to solve my two problems.
>> Number 1 (CRS missmatch) was kinda my fault (or let's say the fault of a
>> former QGIS version where my project originally was created in: QGIS did
>> compare proj4 definition and picked the first CRS the definition of the
>> layer matched. As EPSG:31464 and EPSG:31468 have the same proj4 definition
>> but the first is deprecated it was chosen, although my layer is defined as
>> EPSG:31468 in geometry_columns)
>> Number 2 (no PostGIS suppport) was fixed in master
>>
>>
>> Bernhard
>>
>> Am 17.04.2013 09:24, schrieb Victor Olaya:
>>>
>>> Bernhard
>>>
>>>
>>> I am sorry to hear about your bad experience. Could you detail a bit
>>> more about what you are doing (algorithms you are running, etc)?.
>>> PostGIS layers should work without problems, but I have recently fixed
>>> a problem with PostGIS when using SAGA algorithms, so there might be
>>> other issues like that.
>>>
>>> If you want, you can send me your layers and model, so I can have a
>>> look and try to find out what is happening
>>>
>>> Many thanks for your collaboration (and patience)
>>>
>>> Victor
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/4/17 Bernhard Ströbl:

 Hi all,

 for a course I am about to give tomorrow I played a bit with SEXTANTE,
 although I am going to teach geoprocessing with fTools (we are using QGIS
 1.8). It was my first go with SEXTANTE and I was about to show what it
 will
 offer in the future. Therefore I built a small model with three input
 layers
 a buffer and two overlay operations. I did not succeed in running the
 model
 so I tried in current master.
 As it currently is SEXTANTE is not operable for me (or I am doing it
 wrong):
 First message is "Layers do not all use the same CRS" although they
 definitely do and the same EPSG-code is noted in square brackets behind
 each
 layer name!? Second I get an "Error executing algorithm..." it seems as
 SEXTANTE cannot use PostGIS layers as input (when I save them as shape
 files
 the model runs perfectly), this is a big limitation as my institution
 stores
 almost everything in PostGIS. (SEXTANTE should not offer PostGIS layers
 to
 choose as input layers then).

 Well, this was a very disappointing experience because additionally QGIS
 was
 frozen two or three times opening or closing the model. I do not want to
 complain, all I want is to ask for keeping fTools as they are until
 SEXTANTE
 can _really_ replace them in all aspects. Then we should remove the
 vector
 menue completely because I agree that finding the tool you are looking
 for
 is a lot easier in SEXTANTE.

 my 2 cents

 Bernhard

 Am 17.04.2013 07:42, schrieb Anita Graser:
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Mathieu Pellerin >  wrote:
>
>  There might be a way to make most people happy here.
>
>  I find the vector menu a nice ui shortcut for useful functions. If
>  sextante relevant functions are at par (or better), couldn't the
>  vector menu items stay, which would please many, and when clicked
>  triggers sextante's function dialogue? Victor? Same thing could
>  happen with vector menu too. Sextante's analysis toolbar is super
>  useful but might be a throwback for some if vector / raster menu
>  functions disappear.
>
>  On human resource (coders and testers) and maintenance angles,
>  keeping to mechanism to do same thing is an obvious waste.
>
> I see. So you'd suggest to keep only Sextante code (where duplicates
> exist!) but provide shortcuts from the menu? I'd +1 that.
> I've been testing a variety of functions in the menus and in Sextante
> over the last days and there are always some broken ones. Neither
> "package" is without major bugs today.
> We need to get it together for 2.0 and that's easier if we can focus on
> one.
>
> Best wishes,
> Anita
>


 __ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus
 signature
 database 8235 (20130416) __

 The message was checked by ESET Mail Security.
 http://www.eset.com



>>
>>
>>

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Alexander Bruy]

On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 10:08:56 -0700 (PDT)
vinayan  wrote:

> I think it is best to have maximum algorithms available in c++ ap,  in the
> analysis module(i see that some are already available)..I would be willing
> to contribute to it if required

All fTools functions are in Python. C++ implementation in analysis
lib needs review and maybe some refactoring to support selected
features and memory layers.

-- 
Alexander Bruy
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[vinayan]

+1 for keeping the vector menu.

I think it is best to have maximum algorithms available in c++ ap,  in the
analysis module(i see that some are already available)..I would be willing
to contribute to it if required

thanks
Vinayan



--
View this message in context: 
http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/fTools-and-GdalTools-sextante-vs-original-plugins-tp5041430p5047742.html
Sent from the Quantum GIS - Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Anita Graser]

Am 17.04.2013, 18:26 Uhr, schrieb Paolo Cavallini :

so until we have a proper, automatic test at every commit, I would
prefer to rest on solid ground.


Let me just note that I'm not so sure how solid our ground is. E.g. ftools  
union tool used to work fine and is broken now. Same with ftools distance  
matrix.


Anita
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Paolo Cavallini]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Il 17/04/2013 16:30, Filipe Dias ha scritto:
> Get Qgis Master, randomly (or deliberately) choose tools that you
> know how to use and run them. If they don't work as expected,
> report a bug:
> 
> http://hub.qgis.org/projects/sextante/issues
> 
> When I have enough time, I do my regular work using Qgis Master
> and report the bugs that I find.

There is a lso a nice way to create automatic tests, see Victor
suggestions.
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 v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAlFuzlAACgkQ/NedwLUzIr7FFACgje5cvr5oiC6+2mXU1uDGRgw9
FeAAnjWMJKbQB7AedryyMN78D1PVGxW5
=TYGF
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Paolo Cavallini]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Il 17/04/2013 08:56, Alexander Bruy ha scritto:

> Agreed, having such functionality in SEXTANTE will be great and not
> only for GDAL but for all command-line tools. And AFAIK something 
> already here ? executed commands available in history manager.

Yes, it should be more evident to the user, and easier to copy-paste
to be run from the shell without modification.
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 v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAlFuzfYACgkQ/NedwLUzIr50FACaAslp75dVKbdbiDK6jtEEGYgu
go8AoIsD+BVAhTFNH0Rs4f7ApqHH/l8s
=7e6m
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Paolo Cavallini]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Il 17/04/2013 09:49, Victor Olaya ha scritto:
> I like the idea of allowing menu entries to be defined from
> SEXTANTE algorithms, as a shortcut to them. If we agree on that, I
> could start working on it.

yes, nice idea - be careful not to generate confusion with existing
tools; perhaps this can be done by adding a sextante minilogo to the
icon for the tool.
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 v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAlFuzYgACgkQ/NedwLUzIr7bMgCfQyFaiCepEu1FKjpWNyEac8k/
OkEAoJrWHEwYTNxfjJUVOzVq1Xk6diTI
=hayS
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Paolo Cavallini]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Il 17/04/2013 10:29, Filipe Dias ha scritto:
> I agree with allowing the user to define some Menu entries. As an
> end user I'd rather have all Analytical tools in one place, but
> this would allow people "to not loose their habit" of calling some
> more commonly used tools (I agree with Paolo, a poll with be good)
> from the Menu.
> 
> Sextante is more stable in the areas where there more users. This
> can only be solved if more people step in for testing or when the
> full testing suite is completed. In any case, Sextante is the
> single most powerfull GIS analysis tool out there, including
> proprietary software. It's a huge undertaking and it is being
> carried by very few people. I wish there were more people
> contributing to the code and testing it.

Hi all.
I like the way this discussion is going.
I suggested to postpone the removal of "old" commands because I think
there is still a lot to do in Sextante, and it would be risky to
remove well tested tools too early. Furthermore, it is still
comparatively easy to break some functionalities with small changes,
so until we have a proper, automatic test at every commit, I would
prefer to rest on solid ground.
If things change in the next month or so, I'd be the first to support
Sextante (as I've always been).
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 v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAlFuzTQACgkQ/NedwLUzIr775ACbBlQtSVFTLPGArnAjHoF4xy4O
gWIAn3VZgRusS97ZjQCH7j/shb4xph2E
=709r
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Filipe Dias]

Get Qgis Master, randomly (or deliberately) choose tools that you know how
to use and run them. If they don't work as expected, report a bug:

http://hub.qgis.org/projects/sextante/issues

When I have enough time, I do my regular work using Qgis Master and report
the bugs that I find.



On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 2:17 PM, antoniolocandro <
antoniolocan...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Well since I can't code I can help with the testing, just point me where
> to start and I will try Sextante
>
>
>
>
> Sent from Samsung tablet
>
> Filipe Dias  wrote:
> I agree with allowing the user to define some Menu entries. As an end user
> I'd rather have all Analytical tools in one place, but this would allow
> people "to not loose their habit" of calling some more commonly used tools
> (I agree with Paolo, a poll with be good) from the Menu.
>
> Sextante is more stable in the areas where there more users. This can only
> be solved if more people step in for testing or when the full testing suite
> is completed. In any case, Sextante is the single most powerfull GIS
> analysis tool out there, including proprietary software. It's a huge
> undertaking and it is being carried by very few people. I wish there were
> more people contributing to the code and testing it.
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Victor Olaya  wrote:
>
>> I like the idea of allowing menu entries to be defined from SEXTANTE
>> algorithms, as a shortcut to them. If we agree on that, I could start
>> working on it.
>>
>> Thanks everyone for you ideas!
>>
>> Cheers
>> Victor
>>
>> 2013/4/17 Bernhard Ströbl :
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > for a course I am about to give tomorrow I played a bit with SEXTANTE,
>> > although I am going to teach geoprocessing with fTools (we are using
>> QGIS
>> > 1.8). It was my first go with SEXTANTE and I was about to show what it
>> will
>> > offer in the future. Therefore I built a small model with three input
>> layers
>> > a buffer and two overlay operations. I did not succeed in running the
>> model
>> > so I tried in current master.
>> > As it currently is SEXTANTE is not operable for me (or I am doing it
>> wrong):
>> > First message is "Layers do not all use the same CRS" although they
>> > definitely do and the same EPSG-code is noted in square brackets behind
>> each
>> > layer name!? Second I get an "Error executing algorithm..." it seems as
>> > SEXTANTE cannot use PostGIS layers as input (when I save them as shape
>> files
>> > the model runs perfectly), this is a big limitation as my institution
>> stores
>> > almost everything in PostGIS. (SEXTANTE should not offer PostGIS layers
>> to
>> > choose as input layers then).
>> >
>> > Well, this was a very disappointing experience because additionally
>> QGIS was
>> > frozen two or three times opening or closing the model. I do not want to
>> > complain, all I want is to ask for keeping fTools as they are until
>> SEXTANTE
>> > can _really_ replace them in all aspects. Then we should remove the
>> vector
>> > menue completely because I agree that finding the tool you are looking
>> for
>> > is a lot easier in SEXTANTE.
>> >
>> > my 2 cents
>> >
>> > Bernhard
>> >
>> > Am 17.04.2013 07:42, schrieb Anita Graser:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Mathieu Pellerin <
>> nirvn.a...@gmail.com
>> >> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> There might be a way to make most people happy here.
>> >>
>> >> I find the vector menu a nice ui shortcut for useful functions. If
>> >> sextante relevant functions are at par (or better), couldn't the
>> >> vector menu items stay, which would please many, and when clicked
>> >> triggers sextante's function dialogue? Victor? Same thing could
>> >> happen with vector menu too. Sextante's analysis toolbar is super
>> >> useful but might be a throwback for some if vector / raster menu
>> >> functions disappear.
>> >>
>> >> On human resource (coders and testers) and maintenance angles,
>> >> keeping to mechanism to do same thing is an obvious waste.
>> >>
>> >> I see. So you'd suggest to keep only Sextante code (where duplicates
>> >> exist!) but provide shortcuts from the menu? I'd +1 that.
>> >> I've been testing a variety of functions in the menus and in Sextante
>> >> over the last days and there are always some broken ones. Neither
>> >> "package" is without major bugs today.
>> >> We need to get it together for 2.0 and that's easier if we can focus on
>> >> one.
>> >>
>> >> Best wishes,
>> >> Anita
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > __ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus
>> signature
>> > database 8235 (20130416) __
>> >
>> > The message was checked by ESET Mail Security.
>> > http://www.eset.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ___
>> > Qgis-developer mailing list
>> > Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
>> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>> ___
>> Qgis-developer mail

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[antoniolocandro]

Well since I can't code I can help with the testing, just point me where to 
start and I will try Sextante 




Sent from Samsung tabletFilipe Dias  wrote:I agree with 
allowing the user to define some Menu entries. As an end user I'd rather have 
all Analytical tools in one place, but this would allow people "to not loose 
their habit" of calling some more commonly used tools (I agree with Paolo, a 
poll with be good) from the Menu.

Sextante is more stable in the areas where there more users. This can only be 
solved if more people step in for testing or when the full testing suite is 
completed. In any case, Sextante is the single most powerfull GIS analysis tool 
out there, including proprietary software. It's a huge undertaking and it is 
being carried by very few people. I wish there were more people contributing to 
the code and testing it. 


On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Victor Olaya  wrote:
I like the idea of allowing menu entries to be defined from SEXTANTE
algorithms, as a shortcut to them. If we agree on that, I could start
working on it.

Thanks everyone for you ideas!

Cheers
Victor

2013/4/17 Bernhard Ströbl :
> Hi all,
>
> for a course I am about to give tomorrow I played a bit with SEXTANTE,
> although I am going to teach geoprocessing with fTools (we are using QGIS
> 1.8). It was my first go with SEXTANTE and I was about to show what it will
> offer in the future. Therefore I built a small model with three input layers
> a buffer and two overlay operations. I did not succeed in running the model
> so I tried in current master.
> As it currently is SEXTANTE is not operable for me (or I am doing it wrong):
> First message is "Layers do not all use the same CRS" although they
> definitely do and the same EPSG-code is noted in square brackets behind each
> layer name!? Second I get an "Error executing algorithm..." it seems as
> SEXTANTE cannot use PostGIS layers as input (when I save them as shape files
> the model runs perfectly), this is a big limitation as my institution stores
> almost everything in PostGIS. (SEXTANTE should not offer PostGIS layers to
> choose as input layers then).
>
> Well, this was a very disappointing experience because additionally QGIS was
> frozen two or three times opening or closing the model. I do not want to
> complain, all I want is to ask for keeping fTools as they are until SEXTANTE
> can _really_ replace them in all aspects. Then we should remove the vector
> menue completely because I agree that finding the tool you are looking for
> is a lot easier in SEXTANTE.
>
> my 2 cents
>
> Bernhard
>
> Am 17.04.2013 07:42, schrieb Anita Graser:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Mathieu Pellerin > > wrote:
>>
>>     There might be a way to make most people happy here.
>>
>>     I find the vector menu a nice ui shortcut for useful functions. If
>>     sextante relevant functions are at par (or better), couldn't the
>>     vector menu items stay, which would please many, and when clicked
>>     triggers sextante's function dialogue? Victor? Same thing could
>>     happen with vector menu too. Sextante's analysis toolbar is super
>>     useful but might be a throwback for some if vector / raster menu
>>     functions disappear.
>>
>>     On human resource (coders and testers) and maintenance angles,
>>     keeping to mechanism to do same thing is an obvious waste.
>>
>> I see. So you'd suggest to keep only Sextante code (where duplicates
>> exist!) but provide shortcuts from the menu? I'd +1 that.
>> I've been testing a variety of functions in the menus and in Sextante
>> over the last days and there are always some broken ones. Neither
>> "package" is without major bugs today.
>> We need to get it together for 2.0 and that's easier if we can focus on
>> one.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Anita
>>
>
>
> __ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus signature
> database 8235 (20130416) __
>
> The message was checked by ESET Mail Security.
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Bernhard Ströbl]

Wouldn't it be good to have SEXTANTE as category in the bug tracker 
(like fTools and GDAL tools)?


Bernhard

Am 17.04.2013 12:27, schrieb Victor Olaya:

Bernard's problem was related with using non-file layers in the
modeler. It was a very easy fix, so please, everyone that's using
SEXTANTE, share your problems so we can work on them and make the
software more stable. :-)

Thanks in advance!

2013/4/17 Bernhard Ströbl:

Hi all,

just want to inform you that Victor was able to solve my two problems.
Number 1 (CRS missmatch) was kinda my fault (or let's say the fault of a
former QGIS version where my project originally was created in: QGIS did
compare proj4 definition and picked the first CRS the definition of the
layer matched. As EPSG:31464 and EPSG:31468 have the same proj4 definition
but the first is deprecated it was chosen, although my layer is defined as
EPSG:31468 in geometry_columns)
Number 2 (no PostGIS suppport) was fixed in master


Bernhard

Am 17.04.2013 09:24, schrieb Victor Olaya:


Bernhard


I am sorry to hear about your bad experience. Could you detail a bit
more about what you are doing (algorithms you are running, etc)?.
PostGIS layers should work without problems, but I have recently fixed
a problem with PostGIS when using SAGA algorithms, so there might be
other issues like that.

If you want, you can send me your layers and model, so I can have a
look and try to find out what is happening

Many thanks for your collaboration (and patience)

Victor


2013/4/17 Bernhard Ströbl:


Hi all,

for a course I am about to give tomorrow I played a bit with SEXTANTE,
although I am going to teach geoprocessing with fTools (we are using QGIS
1.8). It was my first go with SEXTANTE and I was about to show what it
will
offer in the future. Therefore I built a small model with three input
layers
a buffer and two overlay operations. I did not succeed in running the
model
so I tried in current master.
As it currently is SEXTANTE is not operable for me (or I am doing it
wrong):
First message is "Layers do not all use the same CRS" although they
definitely do and the same EPSG-code is noted in square brackets behind
each
layer name!? Second I get an "Error executing algorithm..." it seems as
SEXTANTE cannot use PostGIS layers as input (when I save them as shape
files
the model runs perfectly), this is a big limitation as my institution
stores
almost everything in PostGIS. (SEXTANTE should not offer PostGIS layers
to
choose as input layers then).

Well, this was a very disappointing experience because additionally QGIS
was
frozen two or three times opening or closing the model. I do not want to
complain, all I want is to ask for keeping fTools as they are until
SEXTANTE
can _really_ replace them in all aspects. Then we should remove the
vector
menue completely because I agree that finding the tool you are looking
for
is a lot easier in SEXTANTE.

my 2 cents

Bernhard

Am 17.04.2013 07:42, schrieb Anita Graser:



On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Mathieu Pellerinmailto:nirvn.a...@gmail.com>>   wrote:

  There might be a way to make most people happy here.

  I find the vector menu a nice ui shortcut for useful functions. If
  sextante relevant functions are at par (or better), couldn't the
  vector menu items stay, which would please many, and when clicked
  triggers sextante's function dialogue? Victor? Same thing could
  happen with vector menu too. Sextante's analysis toolbar is super
  useful but might be a throwback for some if vector / raster menu
  functions disappear.

  On human resource (coders and testers) and maintenance angles,
  keeping to mechanism to do same thing is an obvious waste.

I see. So you'd suggest to keep only Sextante code (where duplicates
exist!) but provide shortcuts from the menu? I'd +1 that.
I've been testing a variety of functions in the menus and in Sextante
over the last days and there are always some broken ones. Neither
"package" is without major bugs today.
We need to get it together for 2.0 and that's easier if we can focus on
one.

Best wishes,
Anita




__ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus
signature
database 8235 (20130416) __

The message was checked by ESET Mail Security.
http://www.eset.com






__ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus signature
database 8236 (20130417) __


The message was checked by ESET Mail Security.
http://www.eset.com


___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer



__ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus signature 
database 8236 (20130417) __

The message was checked by ESET Mail Security.
http://www.eset.com




--
Bernhard Ströbl
Anwendungsbetreuer GIS

Kommunale Immobilien Jena
Am Anger 26
07743 Jena

Tel.: 03641 49- 5190
E-Mail: bernhard.stro...@jena.de
Internet: www.kij.de

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Victor Olaya]

Bernard's problem was related with using non-file layers in the
modeler. It was a very easy fix, so please, everyone that's using
SEXTANTE, share your problems so we can work on them and make the
software more stable. :-)

Thanks in advance!

2013/4/17 Bernhard Ströbl :
> Hi all,
>
> just want to inform you that Victor was able to solve my two problems.
> Number 1 (CRS missmatch) was kinda my fault (or let's say the fault of a
> former QGIS version where my project originally was created in: QGIS did
> compare proj4 definition and picked the first CRS the definition of the
> layer matched. As EPSG:31464 and EPSG:31468 have the same proj4 definition
> but the first is deprecated it was chosen, although my layer is defined as
> EPSG:31468 in geometry_columns)
> Number 2 (no PostGIS suppport) was fixed in master
>
>
> Bernhard
>
> Am 17.04.2013 09:24, schrieb Victor Olaya:
>>
>> Bernhard
>>
>>
>> I am sorry to hear about your bad experience. Could you detail a bit
>> more about what you are doing (algorithms you are running, etc)?.
>> PostGIS layers should work without problems, but I have recently fixed
>> a problem with PostGIS when using SAGA algorithms, so there might be
>> other issues like that.
>>
>> If you want, you can send me your layers and model, so I can have a
>> look and try to find out what is happening
>>
>> Many thanks for your collaboration (and patience)
>>
>> Victor
>>
>>
>> 2013/4/17 Bernhard Ströbl:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> for a course I am about to give tomorrow I played a bit with SEXTANTE,
>>> although I am going to teach geoprocessing with fTools (we are using QGIS
>>> 1.8). It was my first go with SEXTANTE and I was about to show what it
>>> will
>>> offer in the future. Therefore I built a small model with three input
>>> layers
>>> a buffer and two overlay operations. I did not succeed in running the
>>> model
>>> so I tried in current master.
>>> As it currently is SEXTANTE is not operable for me (or I am doing it
>>> wrong):
>>> First message is "Layers do not all use the same CRS" although they
>>> definitely do and the same EPSG-code is noted in square brackets behind
>>> each
>>> layer name!? Second I get an "Error executing algorithm..." it seems as
>>> SEXTANTE cannot use PostGIS layers as input (when I save them as shape
>>> files
>>> the model runs perfectly), this is a big limitation as my institution
>>> stores
>>> almost everything in PostGIS. (SEXTANTE should not offer PostGIS layers
>>> to
>>> choose as input layers then).
>>>
>>> Well, this was a very disappointing experience because additionally QGIS
>>> was
>>> frozen two or three times opening or closing the model. I do not want to
>>> complain, all I want is to ask for keeping fTools as they are until
>>> SEXTANTE
>>> can _really_ replace them in all aspects. Then we should remove the
>>> vector
>>> menue completely because I agree that finding the tool you are looking
>>> for
>>> is a lot easier in SEXTANTE.
>>>
>>> my 2 cents
>>>
>>> Bernhard
>>>
>>> Am 17.04.2013 07:42, schrieb Anita Graser:


 On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Mathieu Pellerin>>> >  wrote:

  There might be a way to make most people happy here.

  I find the vector menu a nice ui shortcut for useful functions. If
  sextante relevant functions are at par (or better), couldn't the
  vector menu items stay, which would please many, and when clicked
  triggers sextante's function dialogue? Victor? Same thing could
  happen with vector menu too. Sextante's analysis toolbar is super
  useful but might be a throwback for some if vector / raster menu
  functions disappear.

  On human resource (coders and testers) and maintenance angles,
  keeping to mechanism to do same thing is an obvious waste.

 I see. So you'd suggest to keep only Sextante code (where duplicates
 exist!) but provide shortcuts from the menu? I'd +1 that.
 I've been testing a variety of functions in the menus and in Sextante
 over the last days and there are always some broken ones. Neither
 "package" is without major bugs today.
 We need to get it together for 2.0 and that's easier if we can focus on
 one.

 Best wishes,
 Anita

>>>
>>>
>>> __ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus
>>> signature
>>> database 8235 (20130416) __
>>>
>>> The message was checked by ESET Mail Security.
>>> http://www.eset.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
> __ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus signature
> database 8236 (20130417) __
>
>
> The message was checked by ESET Mail Security.
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Bernhard Ströbl]

Hi all,

just want to inform you that Victor was able to solve my two problems. 
Number 1 (CRS missmatch) was kinda my fault (or let's say the fault of a 
former QGIS version where my project originally was created in: QGIS did 
compare proj4 definition and picked the first CRS the definition of the 
layer matched. As EPSG:31464 and EPSG:31468 have the same proj4 
definition but the first is deprecated it was chosen, although my layer 
is defined as EPSG:31468 in geometry_columns)

Number 2 (no PostGIS suppport) was fixed in master

Bernhard

Am 17.04.2013 09:24, schrieb Victor Olaya:

Bernhard

I am sorry to hear about your bad experience. Could you detail a bit
more about what you are doing (algorithms you are running, etc)?.
PostGIS layers should work without problems, but I have recently fixed
a problem with PostGIS when using SAGA algorithms, so there might be
other issues like that.

If you want, you can send me your layers and model, so I can have a
look and try to find out what is happening

Many thanks for your collaboration (and patience)

Victor


2013/4/17 Bernhard Ströbl:

Hi all,

for a course I am about to give tomorrow I played a bit with SEXTANTE,
although I am going to teach geoprocessing with fTools (we are using QGIS
1.8). It was my first go with SEXTANTE and I was about to show what it will
offer in the future. Therefore I built a small model with three input layers
a buffer and two overlay operations. I did not succeed in running the model
so I tried in current master.
As it currently is SEXTANTE is not operable for me (or I am doing it wrong):
First message is "Layers do not all use the same CRS" although they
definitely do and the same EPSG-code is noted in square brackets behind each
layer name!? Second I get an "Error executing algorithm..." it seems as
SEXTANTE cannot use PostGIS layers as input (when I save them as shape files
the model runs perfectly), this is a big limitation as my institution stores
almost everything in PostGIS. (SEXTANTE should not offer PostGIS layers to
choose as input layers then).

Well, this was a very disappointing experience because additionally QGIS was
frozen two or three times opening or closing the model. I do not want to
complain, all I want is to ask for keeping fTools as they are until SEXTANTE
can _really_ replace them in all aspects. Then we should remove the vector
menue completely because I agree that finding the tool you are looking for
is a lot easier in SEXTANTE.

my 2 cents

Bernhard

Am 17.04.2013 07:42, schrieb Anita Graser:


On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Mathieu Pellerinmailto:nirvn.a...@gmail.com>>  wrote:

 There might be a way to make most people happy here.

 I find the vector menu a nice ui shortcut for useful functions. If
 sextante relevant functions are at par (or better), couldn't the
 vector menu items stay, which would please many, and when clicked
 triggers sextante's function dialogue? Victor? Same thing could
 happen with vector menu too. Sextante's analysis toolbar is super
 useful but might be a throwback for some if vector / raster menu
 functions disappear.

 On human resource (coders and testers) and maintenance angles,
 keeping to mechanism to do same thing is an obvious waste.

I see. So you'd suggest to keep only Sextante code (where duplicates
exist!) but provide shortcuts from the menu? I'd +1 that.
I've been testing a variety of functions in the menus and in Sextante
over the last days and there are always some broken ones. Neither
"package" is without major bugs today.
We need to get it together for 2.0 and that's easier if we can focus on
one.

Best wishes,
Anita




__ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus signature
database 8235 (20130416) __

The message was checked by ESET Mail Security.
http://www.eset.com






__ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus signature 
database 8236 (20130417) __

The message was checked by ESET Mail Security.
http://www.eset.com


___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Filipe Dias]

I agree with allowing the user to define some Menu entries. As an end user
I'd rather have all Analytical tools in one place, but this would allow
people "to not loose their habit" of calling some more commonly used tools
(I agree with Paolo, a poll with be good) from the Menu.

Sextante is more stable in the areas where there more users. This can only
be solved if more people step in for testing or when the full testing suite
is completed. In any case, Sextante is the single most powerfull GIS
analysis tool out there, including proprietary software. It's a huge
undertaking and it is being carried by very few people. I wish there were
more people contributing to the code and testing it.


On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Victor Olaya  wrote:

> I like the idea of allowing menu entries to be defined from SEXTANTE
> algorithms, as a shortcut to them. If we agree on that, I could start
> working on it.
>
> Thanks everyone for you ideas!
>
> Cheers
> Victor
>
> 2013/4/17 Bernhard Ströbl :
> > Hi all,
> >
> > for a course I am about to give tomorrow I played a bit with SEXTANTE,
> > although I am going to teach geoprocessing with fTools (we are using QGIS
> > 1.8). It was my first go with SEXTANTE and I was about to show what it
> will
> > offer in the future. Therefore I built a small model with three input
> layers
> > a buffer and two overlay operations. I did not succeed in running the
> model
> > so I tried in current master.
> > As it currently is SEXTANTE is not operable for me (or I am doing it
> wrong):
> > First message is "Layers do not all use the same CRS" although they
> > definitely do and the same EPSG-code is noted in square brackets behind
> each
> > layer name!? Second I get an "Error executing algorithm..." it seems as
> > SEXTANTE cannot use PostGIS layers as input (when I save them as shape
> files
> > the model runs perfectly), this is a big limitation as my institution
> stores
> > almost everything in PostGIS. (SEXTANTE should not offer PostGIS layers
> to
> > choose as input layers then).
> >
> > Well, this was a very disappointing experience because additionally QGIS
> was
> > frozen two or three times opening or closing the model. I do not want to
> > complain, all I want is to ask for keeping fTools as they are until
> SEXTANTE
> > can _really_ replace them in all aspects. Then we should remove the
> vector
> > menue completely because I agree that finding the tool you are looking
> for
> > is a lot easier in SEXTANTE.
> >
> > my 2 cents
> >
> > Bernhard
> >
> > Am 17.04.2013 07:42, schrieb Anita Graser:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Mathieu Pellerin  >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> There might be a way to make most people happy here.
> >>
> >> I find the vector menu a nice ui shortcut for useful functions. If
> >> sextante relevant functions are at par (or better), couldn't the
> >> vector menu items stay, which would please many, and when clicked
> >> triggers sextante's function dialogue? Victor? Same thing could
> >> happen with vector menu too. Sextante's analysis toolbar is super
> >> useful but might be a throwback for some if vector / raster menu
> >> functions disappear.
> >>
> >> On human resource (coders and testers) and maintenance angles,
> >> keeping to mechanism to do same thing is an obvious waste.
> >>
> >> I see. So you'd suggest to keep only Sextante code (where duplicates
> >> exist!) but provide shortcuts from the menu? I'd +1 that.
> >> I've been testing a variety of functions in the menus and in Sextante
> >> over the last days and there are always some broken ones. Neither
> >> "package" is without major bugs today.
> >> We need to get it together for 2.0 and that's easier if we can focus on
> >> one.
> >>
> >> Best wishes,
> >> Anita
> >>
> >
> >
> > __ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus
> signature
> > database 8235 (20130416) __
> >
> > The message was checked by ESET Mail Security.
> > http://www.eset.com
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Qgis-developer mailing list
> > Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Victor Olaya]

I like the idea of allowing menu entries to be defined from SEXTANTE
algorithms, as a shortcut to them. If we agree on that, I could start
working on it.

Thanks everyone for you ideas!

Cheers
Victor

2013/4/17 Bernhard Ströbl :
> Hi all,
>
> for a course I am about to give tomorrow I played a bit with SEXTANTE,
> although I am going to teach geoprocessing with fTools (we are using QGIS
> 1.8). It was my first go with SEXTANTE and I was about to show what it will
> offer in the future. Therefore I built a small model with three input layers
> a buffer and two overlay operations. I did not succeed in running the model
> so I tried in current master.
> As it currently is SEXTANTE is not operable for me (or I am doing it wrong):
> First message is "Layers do not all use the same CRS" although they
> definitely do and the same EPSG-code is noted in square brackets behind each
> layer name!? Second I get an "Error executing algorithm..." it seems as
> SEXTANTE cannot use PostGIS layers as input (when I save them as shape files
> the model runs perfectly), this is a big limitation as my institution stores
> almost everything in PostGIS. (SEXTANTE should not offer PostGIS layers to
> choose as input layers then).
>
> Well, this was a very disappointing experience because additionally QGIS was
> frozen two or three times opening or closing the model. I do not want to
> complain, all I want is to ask for keeping fTools as they are until SEXTANTE
> can _really_ replace them in all aspects. Then we should remove the vector
> menue completely because I agree that finding the tool you are looking for
> is a lot easier in SEXTANTE.
>
> my 2 cents
>
> Bernhard
>
> Am 17.04.2013 07:42, schrieb Anita Graser:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Mathieu Pellerin > > wrote:
>>
>> There might be a way to make most people happy here.
>>
>> I find the vector menu a nice ui shortcut for useful functions. If
>> sextante relevant functions are at par (or better), couldn't the
>> vector menu items stay, which would please many, and when clicked
>> triggers sextante's function dialogue? Victor? Same thing could
>> happen with vector menu too. Sextante's analysis toolbar is super
>> useful but might be a throwback for some if vector / raster menu
>> functions disappear.
>>
>> On human resource (coders and testers) and maintenance angles,
>> keeping to mechanism to do same thing is an obvious waste.
>>
>> I see. So you'd suggest to keep only Sextante code (where duplicates
>> exist!) but provide shortcuts from the menu? I'd +1 that.
>> I've been testing a variety of functions in the menus and in Sextante
>> over the last days and there are always some broken ones. Neither
>> "package" is without major bugs today.
>> We need to get it together for 2.0 and that's easier if we can focus on
>> one.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Anita
>>
>
>
> __ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus signature
> database 8235 (20130416) __
>
> The message was checked by ESET Mail Security.
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Bernhard Ströbl]

Hi Victor,

thank you for your quick reply and even more for all the work you are 
doing for SEXTANTE. If it is operable (and I am sure, it will be) 
SEXTANTE will be a big step forward for QGIS!
I am going to send you the model an layers (as shape files, you need to 
import two of them into PostGIS) in a PM. SAGA is not installed on my 
machine.


Bernhard

Am 17.04.2013 09:24, schrieb Victor Olaya:

Bernhard

I am sorry to hear about your bad experience. Could you detail a bit
more about what you are doing (algorithms you are running, etc)?.
PostGIS layers should work without problems, but I have recently fixed
a problem with PostGIS when using SAGA algorithms, so there might be
other issues like that.

If you want, you can send me your layers and model, so I can have a
look and try to find out what is happening

Many thanks for your collaboration (and patience)

Victor


2013/4/17 Bernhard Ströbl:

Hi all,

for a course I am about to give tomorrow I played a bit with SEXTANTE,
although I am going to teach geoprocessing with fTools (we are using QGIS
1.8). It was my first go with SEXTANTE and I was about to show what it will
offer in the future. Therefore I built a small model with three input layers
a buffer and two overlay operations. I did not succeed in running the model
so I tried in current master.
As it currently is SEXTANTE is not operable for me (or I am doing it wrong):
First message is "Layers do not all use the same CRS" although they
definitely do and the same EPSG-code is noted in square brackets behind each
layer name!? Second I get an "Error executing algorithm..." it seems as
SEXTANTE cannot use PostGIS layers as input (when I save them as shape files
the model runs perfectly), this is a big limitation as my institution stores
almost everything in PostGIS. (SEXTANTE should not offer PostGIS layers to
choose as input layers then).

Well, this was a very disappointing experience because additionally QGIS was
frozen two or three times opening or closing the model. I do not want to
complain, all I want is to ask for keeping fTools as they are until SEXTANTE
can _really_ replace them in all aspects. Then we should remove the vector
menue completely because I agree that finding the tool you are looking for
is a lot easier in SEXTANTE.

my 2 cents

Bernhard

Am 17.04.2013 07:42, schrieb Anita Graser:


On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Mathieu Pellerinmailto:nirvn.a...@gmail.com>>  wrote:

 There might be a way to make most people happy here.

 I find the vector menu a nice ui shortcut for useful functions. If
 sextante relevant functions are at par (or better), couldn't the
 vector menu items stay, which would please many, and when clicked
 triggers sextante's function dialogue? Victor? Same thing could
 happen with vector menu too. Sextante's analysis toolbar is super
 useful but might be a throwback for some if vector / raster menu
 functions disappear.

 On human resource (coders and testers) and maintenance angles,
 keeping to mechanism to do same thing is an obvious waste.

I see. So you'd suggest to keep only Sextante code (where duplicates
exist!) but provide shortcuts from the menu? I'd +1 that.
I've been testing a variety of functions in the menus and in Sextante
over the last days and there are always some broken ones. Neither
"package" is without major bugs today.
We need to get it together for 2.0 and that's easier if we can focus on
one.

Best wishes,
Anita




__ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus signature
database 8235 (20130416) __

The message was checked by ESET Mail Security.
http://www.eset.com






__ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus signature 
database 8235 (20130416) __

The message was checked by ESET Mail Security.
http://www.eset.com


___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Victor Olaya]

Bernhard

I am sorry to hear about your bad experience. Could you detail a bit
more about what you are doing (algorithms you are running, etc)?.
PostGIS layers should work without problems, but I have recently fixed
a problem with PostGIS when using SAGA algorithms, so there might be
other issues like that.

If you want, you can send me your layers and model, so I can have a
look and try to find out what is happening

Many thanks for your collaboration (and patience)

Victor


2013/4/17 Bernhard Ströbl :
> Hi all,
>
> for a course I am about to give tomorrow I played a bit with SEXTANTE,
> although I am going to teach geoprocessing with fTools (we are using QGIS
> 1.8). It was my first go with SEXTANTE and I was about to show what it will
> offer in the future. Therefore I built a small model with three input layers
> a buffer and two overlay operations. I did not succeed in running the model
> so I tried in current master.
> As it currently is SEXTANTE is not operable for me (or I am doing it wrong):
> First message is "Layers do not all use the same CRS" although they
> definitely do and the same EPSG-code is noted in square brackets behind each
> layer name!? Second I get an "Error executing algorithm..." it seems as
> SEXTANTE cannot use PostGIS layers as input (when I save them as shape files
> the model runs perfectly), this is a big limitation as my institution stores
> almost everything in PostGIS. (SEXTANTE should not offer PostGIS layers to
> choose as input layers then).
>
> Well, this was a very disappointing experience because additionally QGIS was
> frozen two or three times opening or closing the model. I do not want to
> complain, all I want is to ask for keeping fTools as they are until SEXTANTE
> can _really_ replace them in all aspects. Then we should remove the vector
> menue completely because I agree that finding the tool you are looking for
> is a lot easier in SEXTANTE.
>
> my 2 cents
>
> Bernhard
>
> Am 17.04.2013 07:42, schrieb Anita Graser:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Mathieu Pellerin > > wrote:
>>
>> There might be a way to make most people happy here.
>>
>> I find the vector menu a nice ui shortcut for useful functions. If
>> sextante relevant functions are at par (or better), couldn't the
>> vector menu items stay, which would please many, and when clicked
>> triggers sextante's function dialogue? Victor? Same thing could
>> happen with vector menu too. Sextante's analysis toolbar is super
>> useful but might be a throwback for some if vector / raster menu
>> functions disappear.
>>
>> On human resource (coders and testers) and maintenance angles,
>> keeping to mechanism to do same thing is an obvious waste.
>>
>> I see. So you'd suggest to keep only Sextante code (where duplicates
>> exist!) but provide shortcuts from the menu? I'd +1 that.
>> I've been testing a variety of functions in the menus and in Sextante
>> over the last days and there are always some broken ones. Neither
>> "package" is without major bugs today.
>> We need to get it together for 2.0 and that's easier if we can focus on
>> one.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Anita
>>
>
>
> __ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus signature
> database 8235 (20130416) __
>
> The message was checked by ESET Mail Security.
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Bernhard Ströbl]

Hi all,

for a course I am about to give tomorrow I played a bit with SEXTANTE, 
although I am going to teach geoprocessing with fTools (we are using 
QGIS 1.8). It was my first go with SEXTANTE and I was about to show what 
it will offer in the future. Therefore I built a small model with three 
input layers a buffer and two overlay operations. I did not succeed in 
running the model so I tried in current master.
As it currently is SEXTANTE is not operable for me (or I am doing it 
wrong): First message is "Layers do not all use the same CRS" 
although they definitely do and the same EPSG-code is noted in square 
brackets behind each layer name!? Second I get an "Error executing 
algorithm..." it seems as SEXTANTE cannot use PostGIS layers as input 
(when I save them as shape files the model runs perfectly), this is a 
big limitation as my institution stores almost everything in PostGIS. 
(SEXTANTE should not offer PostGIS layers to choose as input layers then).


Well, this was a very disappointing experience because additionally QGIS 
was frozen two or three times opening or closing the model. I do not 
want to complain, all I want is to ask for keeping fTools as they are 
until SEXTANTE can _really_ replace them in all aspects. Then we should 
remove the vector menue completely because I agree that finding the tool 
you are looking for is a lot easier in SEXTANTE.


my 2 cents

Bernhard

Am 17.04.2013 07:42, schrieb Anita Graser:

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Mathieu Pellerin mailto:nirvn.a...@gmail.com>> wrote:

There might be a way to make most people happy here.

I find the vector menu a nice ui shortcut for useful functions. If
sextante relevant functions are at par (or better), couldn't the
vector menu items stay, which would please many, and when clicked
triggers sextante's function dialogue? Victor? Same thing could
happen with vector menu too. Sextante's analysis toolbar is super
useful but might be a throwback for some if vector / raster menu
functions disappear.

On human resource (coders and testers) and maintenance angles,
keeping to mechanism to do same thing is an obvious waste.

I see. So you'd suggest to keep only Sextante code (where duplicates
exist!) but provide shortcuts from the menu? I'd +1 that.
I've been testing a variety of functions in the menus and in Sextante
over the last days and there are always some broken ones. Neither
"package" is without major bugs today.
We need to get it together for 2.0 and that's easier if we can focus on one.

Best wishes,
Anita




__ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus signature 
database 8235 (20130416) __

The message was checked by ESET Mail Security.
http://www.eset.com


___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Alexander Bruy]

Hi,

personally I think that we should leave only SEXTANTE but first need
to implement all missed functionality.

On Tue, 16 Apr 2013 09:34:13 -0700 (PDT)
Anita Graser  wrote:

> In case of GDAL tools, I see the advantage of being able to copy the GDAL
> code.

Agreed, having such functionality in SEXTANTE will be great and not only for 
GDAL but for all command-line tools. And AFAIK something
already here — executed commands available in history manager.

Regarding keeping menu entries, maybe it is better to allow users create own 
groups in SEXTANTE toolbox and populate them with various
tools?

-- 
Alexander Bruy
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Mathieu Pellerin]

Paolo, imo decision of looking into this option for 2.0 vs 2.1 should be
primarily driven by quality. If qgis can offer better  quality in vector
functions by maintaining the two mechanism for 2.0 then it should be
deferred to 2.1. If the opposite is true, then might be worth for Victor to
weight in and state whether such proposal can be achieved for 2.0.

M
On 17 Apr 2013 13:14, "Paolo Cavallini"  wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Il 17/04/2013 07:42, Anita Graser ha scritto:
>
> > I see. So you'd suggest to keep only Sextante code (where duplicates
> exist!) but
> > provide shortcuts from the menu? I'd +1 that.
> > I've been testing a variety of functions in the menus and in Sextante
> over the last
> > days and there are always some broken ones. Neither "package" is without
> major bugs
> > today.
> > We need to get it together for 2.0 and that's easier if we can focus on
> one.
>
> Hi all.
> My proposal:
> * leave the duplication for 2.0
> * go towards removing it for 2.1, *only* when a full testing framework is
> in place,
> and we are *sure* everythiong is working properly
> * leave shortcuts for the most commonly used functions (maybe a poll can
> help here),
> and possibly an option "add to shortcut menu" for the user
> * leave the commandline available for the programs that allow running it
> straight
> away (gdal, grass, saga, ?), so users can reuse them in scripts etc.
> 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 v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlFuPaYACgkQ/NedwLUzIr4s0QCeJzjM/G4tJChlrV0NEyuBFOXb
> O8UAoIzjcBObUuEhcJFca2uf55BDNAcg
> =n3af
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Mathieu Pellerin]

Anita, yep, remove code for ftool functions that are in sextante but keep
vector menu shortcuts.
On 17 Apr 2013 12:42, "Anita Graser"  wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Mathieu Pellerin wrote:
>
>> There might be a way to make most people happy here.
>>
>> I find the vector menu a nice ui shortcut for useful functions. If
>> sextante relevant functions are at par (or better), couldn't the vector
>> menu items stay, which would please many, and when clicked triggers
>> sextante's function dialogue? Victor? Same thing could happen with vector
>> menu too. Sextante's analysis toolbar is super useful but might be a
>> throwback for some if vector / raster menu functions disappear.
>>
>> On human resource (coders and testers) and maintenance angles, keeping to
>> mechanism to do same thing is an obvious waste.
>>
> I see. So you'd suggest to keep only Sextante code (where duplicates
> exist!) but provide shortcuts from the menu? I'd +1 that.
> I've been testing a variety of functions in the menus and in Sextante over
> the last days and there are always some broken ones. Neither "package" is
> without major bugs today.
> We need to get it together for 2.0 and that's easier if we can focus on
> one.
>
> Best wishes,
> Anita
>
>>
>
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Paolo Cavallini]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Il 17/04/2013 07:42, Anita Graser ha scritto:

> I see. So you'd suggest to keep only Sextante code (where duplicates exist!) 
> but
> provide shortcuts from the menu? I'd +1 that. 
> I've been testing a variety of functions in the menus and in Sextante over 
> the last
> days and there are always some broken ones. Neither "package" is without 
> major bugs
> today.
> We need to get it together for 2.0 and that's easier if we can focus on one.

Hi all.
My proposal:
* leave the duplication for 2.0
* go towards removing it for 2.1, *only* when a full testing framework is in 
place,
and we are *sure* everythiong is working properly
* leave shortcuts for the most commonly used functions (maybe a poll can help 
here),
and possibly an option "add to shortcut menu" for the user
* leave the commandline available for the programs that allow running it 
straight
away (gdal, grass, saga, ?), so users can reuse them in scripts etc.
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 v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAlFuPaYACgkQ/NedwLUzIr4s0QCeJzjM/G4tJChlrV0NEyuBFOXb
O8UAoIzjcBObUuEhcJFca2uf55BDNAcg
=n3af
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Anita Graser]

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Mathieu Pellerin wrote:

> There might be a way to make most people happy here.
>
> I find the vector menu a nice ui shortcut for useful functions. If
> sextante relevant functions are at par (or better), couldn't the vector
> menu items stay, which would please many, and when clicked triggers
> sextante's function dialogue? Victor? Same thing could happen with vector
> menu too. Sextante's analysis toolbar is super useful but might be a
> throwback for some if vector / raster menu functions disappear.
>
> On human resource (coders and testers) and maintenance angles, keeping to
> mechanism to do same thing is an obvious waste.
>
I see. So you'd suggest to keep only Sextante code (where duplicates
exist!) but provide shortcuts from the menu? I'd +1 that.
I've been testing a variety of functions in the menus and in Sextante over
the last days and there are always some broken ones. Neither "package" is
without major bugs today.
We need to get it together for 2.0 and that's easier if we can focus on one.

Best wishes,
Anita

>
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Mathieu Pellerin]

There might be a way to make most people happy here.

I find the vector menu a nice ui shortcut for useful functions. If sextante
relevant functions are at par (or better), couldn't the vector menu items
stay, which would please many, and when clicked triggers sextante's
function dialogue? Victor? Same thing could happen with vector menu too.
Sextante's analysis toolbar is super useful but might be a throwback for
some if vector / raster menu functions disappear.

On human resource (coders and testers) and maintenance angles, keeping to
mechanism to do same thing is an obvious waste.

M
On 16 Apr 2013 23:53, "Victor Olaya"  wrote:

> My opinion on this (clearly biased, of course), is that the argument
> of not making sense to look for algorithms under a menu called
> "sextante" is not a very strong one. First, the menu is called
> "Analysis" (which makes much more sense that looking for processes in
> something called "vector", since that is much more generic).
> Second, I think that SEXTANTE is not much different than GDAL or
> GRASS, since they are all acronyms.
>
> But, as I said, I have a biased opinion...and I might be too used to
> the name :-)
>
> All ideas (thanks Anita for your ones!) about what is missing in
> SEXTANTE to fully replace those independent plugins, are welcome
>
> Regards
> Victor
>
> 2013/4/16 Anita Graser :
> > Hi,
> >
> > I know this thread has been silent for a while but I think it's
> important to
> > bring it up once more.
> > I'm currently trying to develop some materials and wondering if they
> should
> > cover ftools/GDAL or Sextante mainly. Currently, it sounds like it is
> > certain that Sextante will be around in future versions while the future
> of
> > ftools/GDAL tools is less certain.
> >
> > I don't care much about ftools. I don't like having to create new
> Shapefiles
> > every time I run an algorithm. I never managed to remember which tool is
> in
> > which submenu.
> >
> > In case of GDAL tools, I see the advantage of being able to copy the GDAL
> > code.
> >
> > In Sextante, it's easy to find the tools by name and the results can be
> > temporal layers. So I strongly disagree with previous arguments that
> > Sextante is not valuable from a user perspective.
> >
> > Even if we don't reach a consensus whether both menus and toolbox should
> be
> > around permanently, could someone please confirm what will be the
> situation
> > in 2.0? Are there any plans to remove anything for the release? Have any
> > decisions been made for after 2.0 yet?
> >
> > Thanks and best wishes,
> > Anita
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/fTools-and-GdalTools-sextante-vs-original-plugins-tp5041430p5047360.html
> > Sent from the Quantum GIS - Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> > ___
> > Qgis-developer mailing list
> > Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Victor Olaya]

My opinion on this (clearly biased, of course), is that the argument
of not making sense to look for algorithms under a menu called
"sextante" is not a very strong one. First, the menu is called
"Analysis" (which makes much more sense that looking for processes in
something called "vector", since that is much more generic).
Second, I think that SEXTANTE is not much different than GDAL or
GRASS, since they are all acronyms.

But, as I said, I have a biased opinion...and I might be too used to
the name :-)

All ideas (thanks Anita for your ones!) about what is missing in
SEXTANTE to fully replace those independent plugins, are welcome

Regards
Victor

2013/4/16 Anita Graser :
> Hi,
>
> I know this thread has been silent for a while but I think it's important to
> bring it up once more.
> I'm currently trying to develop some materials and wondering if they should
> cover ftools/GDAL or Sextante mainly. Currently, it sounds like it is
> certain that Sextante will be around in future versions while the future of
> ftools/GDAL tools is less certain.
>
> I don't care much about ftools. I don't like having to create new Shapefiles
> every time I run an algorithm. I never managed to remember which tool is in
> which submenu.
>
> In case of GDAL tools, I see the advantage of being able to copy the GDAL
> code.
>
> In Sextante, it's easy to find the tools by name and the results can be
> temporal layers. So I strongly disagree with previous arguments that
> Sextante is not valuable from a user perspective.
>
> Even if we don't reach a consensus whether both menus and toolbox should be
> around permanently, could someone please confirm what will be the situation
> in 2.0? Are there any plans to remove anything for the release? Have any
> decisions been made for after 2.0 yet?
>
> Thanks and best wishes,
> Anita
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/fTools-and-GdalTools-sextante-vs-original-plugins-tp5041430p5047360.html
> Sent from the Quantum GIS - Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Filipe Dias]

I agree. Sextante makes finding the appropriate tools a lot easier,
specially when the user is doing GIS analysis for a long time.

In ArcGIS 9.1 or 9.2 ESRI removed the Analysis tools from Menu and put them
all on ArcToolbox. A lot of users complained and they ended up creating a
Geoprocessing menu with Intersection, Union etc. Perhaps something similar
could be done in QGIS.




On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Anita Graser  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I know this thread has been silent for a while but I think it's important
> to
> bring it up once more.
> I'm currently trying to develop some materials and wondering if they should
> cover ftools/GDAL or Sextante mainly. Currently, it sounds like it is
> certain that Sextante will be around in future versions while the future of
> ftools/GDAL tools is less certain.
>
> I don't care much about ftools. I don't like having to create new
> Shapefiles
> every time I run an algorithm. I never managed to remember which tool is in
> which submenu.
>
> In case of GDAL tools, I see the advantage of being able to copy the GDAL
> code.
>
> In Sextante, it's easy to find the tools by name and the results can be
> temporal layers. So I strongly disagree with previous arguments that
> Sextante is not valuable from a user perspective.
>
> Even if we don't reach a consensus whether both menus and toolbox should be
> around permanently, could someone please confirm what will be the situation
> in 2.0? Are there any plans to remove anything for the release? Have any
> decisions been made for after 2.0 yet?
>
> Thanks and best wishes,
> Anita
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/fTools-and-GdalTools-sextante-vs-original-plugins-tp5041430p5047360.html
> Sent from the Quantum GIS - Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Anita Graser]

Hi,

I know this thread has been silent for a while but I think it's important to
bring it up once more.
I'm currently trying to develop some materials and wondering if they should
cover ftools/GDAL or Sextante mainly. Currently, it sounds like it is
certain that Sextante will be around in future versions while the future of
ftools/GDAL tools is less certain. 

I don't care much about ftools. I don't like having to create new Shapefiles
every time I run an algorithm. I never managed to remember which tool is in
which submenu.

In case of GDAL tools, I see the advantage of being able to copy the GDAL
code.

In Sextante, it's easy to find the tools by name and the results can be
temporal layers. So I strongly disagree with previous arguments that
Sextante is not valuable from a user perspective. 

Even if we don't reach a consensus whether both menus and toolbox should be
around permanently, could someone please confirm what will be the situation
in 2.0? Are there any plans to remove anything for the release? Have any
decisions been made for after 2.0 yet?

Thanks and best wishes,
Anita



--
View this message in context: 
http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/fTools-and-GdalTools-sextante-vs-original-plugins-tp5041430p5047360.html
Sent from the Quantum GIS - Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Ramon Andiñach]

On 25/03/2013, at 19:52 , Agustin Lobo wrote:

> I strongly oppose eliminating the tools in fTools and gdaltools from
> the main menu.
> Your argument contemplates the picture from the point of view of the
> developer only.
> While having certain tools (i.e. R scripts, original sextante, OTB...)
> within the
> Sextante menu makes sense, from a user point of view basic tools such as those
> in Vector and Raster are much more intuitive and easy to use as they
> currently are in their
> respective tabs. I actually have always wondered why fTools were
> within Sextante also.
> From the user perspective the unnecessary redundancy is having them
> within Sextante.
> In short, I think that basic GIS functionality must be kept in the
> tabs of the main menu.

+1

> Also, please note this question should be discussed in the users list also.

+1!

Hate to say it, but I'm with Augus on this one.

Particularly this is something that should be at least mentioned, preferably 
discussed in plain sight on the user list.

I would also add that since the other plugins are being encouraged to show up 
in appropriate menus (e.g. plugins that work on vectors in vector, plugins that 
work on database in database, etc.), it would be really unintuitive to me that 
fundamental vector *and* raster functions are in some menu called Sextante.

(I think a way around this, would be to have the menus provided by F-tools and 
GDALTools provided by Sextante and the menu items point to the right thing in 
Sextante - with of course a user useable interface. Not sure if that's viable. 
Agus, would that cover most of your comments too?)

-ramon.
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Caio Hamamura]

Yeah,

I already needed to use as batch when SEXTANTE wasn't that popular, so I
had to use grass instead.
So just the batch feature already justifies the implementation of FTools in
SEXTANTE, thank you guys, it's really a worthy tool.


Caio Hamamura


2013/3/25 Victor Olaya 

> Agustin
>
> >  I actually have always wondered why fTools were
> > within Sextante also.
>
> The main reason is that being part of SEXTANTE, they become more
> powerful tools. They can be used in the modeler, in the batch
> processing interface, in the console... Plus, history is kept for
> those commands as well.
>
> Cheers
>
> p.s. A bit off-topic: the functionality of running R scripts from the
> R scripts editor in SEXATNTE that you asked for, it is already
> implemented in the dev version. If you have time to test it, your
> opinion will be appreciated :-) Thanks!
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Victor Olaya]

Agustin

>  I actually have always wondered why fTools were
> within Sextante also.

The main reason is that being part of SEXTANTE, they become more
powerful tools. They can be used in the modeler, in the batch
processing interface, in the console... Plus, history is kept for
those commands as well.

Cheers

p.s. A bit off-topic: the functionality of running R scripts from the
R scripts editor in SEXATNTE that you asked for, it is already
implemented in the dev version. If you have time to test it, your
opinion will be appreciated :-) Thanks!
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Agustin Lobo]

I strongly oppose eliminating the tools in fTools and gdaltools from
the main menu.
Your argument contemplates the picture from the point of view of the
developer only.
While having certain tools (i.e. R scripts, original sextante, OTB...)
within the
Sextante menu makes sense, from a user point of view basic tools such as those
in Vector and Raster are much more intuitive and easy to use as they
currently are in their
respective tabs. I actually have always wondered why fTools were
within Sextante also.
>From the user perspective the unnecessary redundancy is having them
within Sextante.
In short, I think that basic GIS functionality must be kept in the
tabs of the main menu.

Also, please note this question should be discussed in the users list also.

Agus

On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Martin Dobias  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been wondering recently about the status of original fTools and
> GdalTools plugins and their algorithms in SEXTANTE. As far as I
> understand, the implementation in SEXTANTE is independent from the
> original plugins. That means that any changes in fTools or GdalTools
> have to be ported manually to SEXTANTE (and vice versa). Also the
> users must be confused by having two completely different ways how to
> trigger the same algorithms. Maintaining both versions will be painful
> for us and our users.
>
> The port of original algorithms to SEXTANTE seems to be nearly
> complete  and SEXTANTE has superior approach of creating the GUI for
> algorithms dynamically (similar to GRASS toolbox) instead of manually
> creating GUI for each algorithm. So...what about removing the original
> fTools and GdalTools plugins before 2.0 and focusing on improvements
> of their counterparts in SEXTANTE?
>
> Regards
> Martin
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Giovanni Manghi]

> I also would miss the command line viewer that's in GDAL Tools. That is
> extremely useful when prototyping something that I plan to move to a script.

I forgot about the command line window and the (folder) batch
geoprocessing in gdal tools...

please don't get rid of them without a replacement :)


cheers


-- Giovanni --
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Victor Olaya]

> I'm afraid it would be super confusing to have tools in Sextante but
> not available in Modeller.
>

hmmm, I agree that, in this case, it will be confusing, but SEXTANTE
supports having algorithms that can be in the modeler and not in the
toolbox, or in the toolbox and not in the modeler. There are already a
few of them, though they are a bit different to these ones.
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Anita Graser]

On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Victor Olaya  wrote:
> While we work on moving everything into SEXTANTE, a quick solution can
> be to add new algorithms in SEXTANTE that call the fTools and GDAL
> tools and pop up the current dialogs. They will not be available in
> the SEXTNATE modeler or batch processing interface, but at least they
> will be in SEXTANTE and we can have all analysis stuff available
> there, which might be less confusing.

I'm afraid it would be super confusing to have tools in Sextante but
not available in Modeller.

Anita
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Victor Olaya]

While we work on moving everything into SEXTANTE, a quick solution can
be to add new algorithms in SEXTANTE that call the fTools and GDAL
tools and pop up the current dialogs. They will not be available in
the SEXTNATE modeler or batch processing interface, but at least they
will be in SEXTANTE and we can have all analysis stuff available
there, which might be less confusing.

We should find the way, however, of making clear that this is a
duplicated functionality and that those algorithms are different to
the rest of them

Not sure it is the best idea, but well, I guess it's worth commenting.

Cheers

2013/3/20 Werner Macho :
> Hi!
>
> I am usually also for cleaning up - and removing stuff like duplicate
> labelling and such things but for functions like GDAL and fTools i rather
> tend to hold them as long as there are not all equivalent function available
> elsewhere.
>
> My point would be to rather clean the GUI (less automatically created button
> bars) than try to get rid of them by deleting functions.
>
> Would it be possible to make just a clean GUI with only the basic functions
> (I know .. what are the basic functions) .. but with the possibility to
> build up one button bar by oneself adding only the functions I would need?
> I like the idea of automatically appearing buttons but with a lot of plugins
> activated the space is crowded.
> I think it would be good to create a complete customizeable button bar ..
>
> regards
> Werner
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Alex Mandel 
> wrote:
>>
>> On 03/19/2013 11:34 PM, Alexander Bruy wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 19:40:03 +0100
>>> Martin Dobias  wrote:
>>>
 The port of original algorithms to SEXTANTE seems to be nearly
 complete  and SEXTANTE has superior approach of creating the GUI for
 algorithms dynamically (similar to GRASS toolbox) instead of manually
 creating GUI for each algorithm. So...what about removing the original
 fTools and GdalTools plugins before 2.0 and focusing on improvements
 of their counterparts in SEXTANTE?
>>>
>>>
>>> +1 for removing fTools and GDALTools.
>>>
>>> But unfortunately not all fTools and GDAL tools algorithms ported to
>>> SEXTANTE, some of them still present only in original plugins. I
>>> plan to work on this.
>>>
>>> On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 20:42:04 +0100
>>> Victor Olaya  wrote:
>>>
 Anyway, I think that redundancy in SEXTANTE is not so bad as having
 several ways of doing the same thing in the QGIS interface, since
 users will understand that algorithms come from differnt providers and
 are not completely identical.
>>>
>>>
>>> Also note that some users have no SAGA installed but when similar
>>> algorithm from GDAL (or other more common source) is available they
>>> still can do their work. So redundancy is not bad.
>>>
>>
>> I'd encourage that those tools still be made available via the Vector and
>> Raster menus. Also that they should be update-able via the Fetch python
>> plugins. Preferably independent of Sextante upgrades, but still be the
>> integrated version.
>>
>> I also would miss the command line viewer that's in GDAL Tools. That is
>> extremely useful when prototyping something that I plan to move to a script.
>>
>> Does sextante allow for batch application the way GDALTools currently
>> does?
>>
>> So basically, I'm all for streamlining but I don't want to loose features
>> and flexibility because of that.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alex
>>
>> ___
>> Qgis-developer mailing list
>> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>
>
>
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
>
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Werner Macho]

Hi!

I am usually also for cleaning up - and removing stuff like duplicate
labelling and such things but for functions like GDAL and fTools i rather
tend to hold them as long as there are not all equivalent function
available elsewhere.

My point would be to rather clean the GUI (less automatically created
button bars) than try to get rid of them by deleting functions.

Would it be possible to make just a clean GUI with only the basic functions
(I know .. what are the basic functions) .. but with the possibility to
build up one button bar by oneself adding only the functions I would need?
I like the idea of automatically appearing buttons but with a lot of
plugins activated the space is crowded.
I think it would be good to create a complete customizeable button bar ..

regards
Werner





On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Alex Mandel wrote:

> On 03/19/2013 11:34 PM, Alexander Bruy wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 19:40:03 +0100
>> Martin Dobias  wrote:
>>
>>  The port of original algorithms to SEXTANTE seems to be nearly
>>> complete  and SEXTANTE has superior approach of creating the GUI for
>>> algorithms dynamically (similar to GRASS toolbox) instead of manually
>>> creating GUI for each algorithm. So...what about removing the original
>>> fTools and GdalTools plugins before 2.0 and focusing on improvements
>>> of their counterparts in SEXTANTE?
>>>
>>
>> +1 for removing fTools and GDALTools.
>>
>> But unfortunately not all fTools and GDAL tools algorithms ported to
>> SEXTANTE, some of them still present only in original plugins. I
>> plan to work on this.
>>
>> On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 20:42:04 +0100
>> Victor Olaya  wrote:
>>
>>  Anyway, I think that redundancy in SEXTANTE is not so bad as having
>>> several ways of doing the same thing in the QGIS interface, since
>>> users will understand that algorithms come from differnt providers and
>>> are not completely identical.
>>>
>>
>> Also note that some users have no SAGA installed but when similar
>> algorithm from GDAL (or other more common source) is available they
>> still can do their work. So redundancy is not bad.
>>
>>
> I'd encourage that those tools still be made available via the Vector and
> Raster menus. Also that they should be update-able via the Fetch python
> plugins. Preferably independent of Sextante upgrades, but still be the
> integrated version.
>
> I also would miss the command line viewer that's in GDAL Tools. That is
> extremely useful when prototyping something that I plan to move to a script.
>
> Does sextante allow for batch application the way GDALTools currently does?
>
> So basically, I'm all for streamlining but I don't want to loose features
> and flexibility because of that.
>
> Thanks,
> Alex
>
> __**_
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/**mailman/listinfo/qgis-**developer
>
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Alex Mandel]

On 03/19/2013 11:34 PM, Alexander Bruy wrote:

Hi,

On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 19:40:03 +0100
Martin Dobias  wrote:


The port of original algorithms to SEXTANTE seems to be nearly
complete  and SEXTANTE has superior approach of creating the GUI for
algorithms dynamically (similar to GRASS toolbox) instead of manually
creating GUI for each algorithm. So...what about removing the original
fTools and GdalTools plugins before 2.0 and focusing on improvements
of their counterparts in SEXTANTE?


+1 for removing fTools and GDALTools.

But unfortunately not all fTools and GDAL tools algorithms ported to
SEXTANTE, some of them still present only in original plugins. I
plan to work on this.

On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 20:42:04 +0100
Victor Olaya  wrote:


Anyway, I think that redundancy in SEXTANTE is not so bad as having
several ways of doing the same thing in the QGIS interface, since
users will understand that algorithms come from differnt providers and
are not completely identical.


Also note that some users have no SAGA installed but when similar
algorithm from GDAL (or other more common source) is available they
still can do their work. So redundancy is not bad.



I'd encourage that those tools still be made available via the Vector 
and Raster menus. Also that they should be update-able via the Fetch 
python plugins. Preferably independent of Sextante upgrades, but still 
be the integrated version.


I also would miss the command line viewer that's in GDAL Tools. That is 
extremely useful when prototyping something that I plan to move to a script.


Does sextante allow for batch application the way GDALTools currently does?

So basically, I'm all for streamlining but I don't want to loose 
features and flexibility because of that.


Thanks,
Alex
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Alexander Bruy]

Hi,

On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 19:40:03 +0100
Martin Dobias  wrote:

> The port of original algorithms to SEXTANTE seems to be nearly
> complete  and SEXTANTE has superior approach of creating the GUI for
> algorithms dynamically (similar to GRASS toolbox) instead of manually
> creating GUI for each algorithm. So...what about removing the original
> fTools and GdalTools plugins before 2.0 and focusing on improvements
> of their counterparts in SEXTANTE?

+1 for removing fTools and GDALTools.

But unfortunately not all fTools and GDAL tools algorithms ported to
SEXTANTE, some of them still present only in original plugins. I
plan to work on this.

On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 20:42:04 +0100
Victor Olaya  wrote:

> Anyway, I think that redundancy in SEXTANTE is not so bad as having
> several ways of doing the same thing in the QGIS interface, since
> users will understand that algorithms come from differnt providers and
> are not completely identical.

Also note that some users have no SAGA installed but when similar
algorithm from GDAL (or other more common source) is available they
still can do their work. So redundancy is not bad.

-- 
Alexander Bruy
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Paolo Cavallini]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Il 19/03/2013 20:42, Victor Olaya ha scritto:

> Anyway, I think that redundancy in SEXTANTE is not so bad as having
> several ways of doing the same thing in the QGIS interface, since
> users will understand that algorithms come from differnt providers and
> are not completely identical.

Agreed: redundancy in analyses helps double-checking, and overcoming eventual 
bugs.
The filtering mechanism in Sextante makes redundancy far less confusing than the
usual dropdown menu approach.
So I vote for moving all algorhithms to Sextante, and removing GDALTools and 
fTools
only when the former is well tested.
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
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAlFIzyIACgkQ/NedwLUzIr7MjACeIG8/nV8ARf9xqOnlMj9DlDvL
0wgAmwVo0qqZ/fzLqMUqy2fTHX7Z+8Z4
=FIAe
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Victor Olaya]

Before doing that, we should make sure all algorithms are in SEXTANTE.
Some of them might not be in there, because I did not ported them,
considering that another algorithm was equivalent. Particularly, the
dem tools and the interpolation tools in SAGA should replace the ones
in GDAL and add much more options. Moving those GDAL algorithms to
SEXTANTE would allow to remove the GDAL tools...but will add more
redundant algorithms to SEXTANTE (there are DEM tools already from
SAGA and GRASS), so we have a similar problem.

Anyway, I think that redundancy in SEXTANTE is not so bad as having
several ways of doing the same thing in the QGIS interface, since
users will understand that algorithms come from differnt providers and
are not completely identical.

Cheers

2013/3/19 Giovanni Manghi :
> . So...what about removing the original
>> fTools and GdalTools plugins before 2.0 and focusing on improvements
>> of their counterparts in SEXTANTE?
>
>
> it does not seems so easy to me, in sextante there are missing tools,
> just to make examples, (gdal) clipper, gdaldem, eliminate sliver
> polygons... and others.
>
> Cheers
>
> -- Giovanni --
> ___
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

Re: [Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Giovanni Manghi]

. So...what about removing the original
> fTools and GdalTools plugins before 2.0 and focusing on improvements
> of their counterparts in SEXTANTE?


it does not seems so easy to me, in sextante there are missing tools,
just to make examples, (gdal) clipper, gdaldem, eliminate sliver
polygons... and others.

Cheers

-- Giovanni --
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer

[Qgis-developer] fTools and GdalTools: sextante vs original plugins

[Martin Dobias]

Hi,

I have been wondering recently about the status of original fTools and
GdalTools plugins and their algorithms in SEXTANTE. As far as I
understand, the implementation in SEXTANTE is independent from the
original plugins. That means that any changes in fTools or GdalTools
have to be ported manually to SEXTANTE (and vice versa). Also the
users must be confused by having two completely different ways how to
trigger the same algorithms. Maintaining both versions will be painful
for us and our users.

The port of original algorithms to SEXTANTE seems to be nearly
complete  and SEXTANTE has superior approach of creating the GUI for
algorithms dynamically (similar to GRASS toolbox) instead of manually
creating GUI for each algorithm. So...what about removing the original
fTools and GdalTools plugins before 2.0 and focusing on improvements
of their counterparts in SEXTANTE?

Regards
Martin
___
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer