Re: [Ubuntu] qgis-providers fails to install

[Alex Mandel]

I hit the same problem on recent update.
In my case I was using qgis.org/ubuntugis with the ubuntugis-unstable
There appears to be an incompatibility between the two right now. This 
isn't the first time, and it could be related to recent updates 
2021-12-24, will likely be solved if the qgis.org packages are rebuilt 
now that some new deps in ubuntugis have been updated (Is it Jurgen who 
still manages that?). Until then I just disabled qgis.org repo and 
reinstalled and have an older version working for now.


Thanks,
Alex

On 1/10/22 10:28 AM, Martin Weis wrote:

Hello Jorge!

Am 10.01.22 um 13:43 schrieb Jorge Gustavo Rocha:

It seems to happens when some QGIS tool runs.
My wild guess is to check if you are not running QGIS against some old
PROJ or GDAL version. Check if you have some dangling PROJ or GDAL libs
around.

Found an issue from 2020 about it
https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/issues/35649

and your guess seems the correct direction, but I cannot solve by
starting fresh with

apt remove libgdal29 libgdal30
cat<< EOF> /etc/apt/sources.list.d/qgis-ubuntugis-unstable.list
deb https://qgis.org/ubuntugis $(lsb_release -s -c) main
deb-src https://qgis.org/ubuntugis $(lsb_release -s -c) main
EOF

# lsb_release -s -c # focal

yielding

root@box:/etc/apt# rgrep qgis *
sources.list.d/qgis-ubuntugis-unstable.list:deb
https://qgis.org/ubuntugis focal main
sources.list.d/qgis-ubuntugis-unstable.list:deb-src
https://qgis.org/ubuntugis focal main
Binary file trusted.gpg matches
Binary file trusted.gpg.d/qgis-archive.gpg matches


there are dependencies to both lbgdal29 and libgdal30 from qgis


apt install qgis
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
The following additional packages will be installed:
   gdal-bin grass-core libgdal29 libgdal30 libpdal-base12

libpdal-plugin-e57 libpdal-plugin-faux libpdal-plugin-hdf libpdal-plugin-i3s

   libpdal-plugin-icebridge libpdal-plugin-pgpointcloud libpdal-plugins

libqgis-3d3.22.2 libqgis-analysis3.22.2 libqgis-app3.22.2 libqgis-core3.22.2

   libqgis-customwidgets libqgis-gui3.22.2 libqgis-server3.22.2

libqgisgrass7-3.22.2 libqgispython3.22.2 python3-gdal python3-qgis
python3-qgis-common

   qgis-plugin-grass qgis-provider-grass qgis-providers
Suggested packages:
   libgdal-grass grass-dev grass-gui e00compr avce00 gnuplot gpsbabel

gpstrans python3-rpy2 python3-termcolor otb-qgis saga

The following NEW packages will be installed:
   gdal-bin grass-core libgdal29 libgdal30 libpdal-base12

libpdal-plugin-e57 libpdal-plugin-faux libpdal-plugin-hdf libpdal-plugin-i3s

   libpdal-plugin-icebridge libpdal-plugin-pgpointcloud libpdal-plugins

libqgis-3d3.22.2 libqgis-analysis3.22.2 libqgis-app3.22.2 libqgis-core3.22.2

   libqgis-customwidgets libqgis-gui3.22.2 libqgis-server3.22.2

libqgisgrass7-3.22.2 libqgispython3.22.2 python3-gdal python3-qgis
python3-qgis-common

   qgis qgis-plugin-grass qgis-provider-grass qgis-providers


I guess because of rdepends of python3-gdal


apt show python3-gdal
Version: 3.4.0+dfsg-1~focal0
Maintainer: Debian GIS Project 
Depends: python3 (<< 3.9), python3 (>= 3.8~), python3-numpy (>=

1:1.16.0~rc1), python3-numpy-abi9, python3:any, libc6 (>= 2.14),
libgcc-s1 (>= 3.0), libgdal30 (>= 3.4.0), libstdc++6 (>= 5.2)
which is also from unstable ubuntugis:


apt-cache policy python3-gdal
python3-gdal:
   Installed: (none)
   Candidate: 3.4.0+dfsg-1~focal0
   Version table:
  3.4.0+dfsg-1~focal0 500
 500

http://ppa.launchpad.net/ubuntugis/ubuntugis-unstable/ubuntu focal/main
amd64 Packages

So I will try to switch to ltr for now, but this seems to be a
dependency problem in the repo.

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki



___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] QGis 3 on UbuntuGIS PPA

[Alex Mandel]

On 10/31/18 02:18, Micha Silver wrote:
> QGIS.org + ubuntugis unstable

For the absolute latest of everything where you don't have to build it
yourself.

While it's true that recent Ubuntu has newer of everything, if you use a
LTS variant of Ubuntu you will quickly be behind without using the
QGIS.org and ubuntugis repos. Bionic will soon be in the same situation
as Xenial.

For places of work, I only use LTS releases of Ubuntu. Actually a few
years back personally I stopped using non-LTS releases of Ubuntu at all,
too many minor quirks on each update, was only important if you had
really new hardware that wasn't supported by older releases, which is
mostly solved by the HWE where newer kernels can be installed on LTS
releases.

Thanks,
Alex
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Gis Packages for RPI

[Alex Mandel]

Yes you are correct those dependencies are part of DebianGIS/UbuntuGIS
as Cartodb is built using them.

Logically step 1 would be to start checking if all of those libraries
and tools compile for armhf and are packaged. If you would like to make
a list of packages that need porting we can use that to improve support
or the Pi.

Thanks,
Alex

On 07/09/2016 10:59 AM, Nico Aliotta wrote:
> ok Thanks.
> 
> But i saw that all the packages where gis related:
> pgrouting
> postgis
> ogr2ogr2
>  proj
> 
> and so on :) So i thought that someone has compiled them also on your list!
> 
> 
> 2016-07-09 19:41 GMT+02:00 Alex Mandel <tech_...@wildintellect.com>:
> 
>> On 07/09/2016 10:21 AM, Nico Aliotta wrote:
>>> I'm trying to install cartodb on a raspberrypi3
>>>
>>> and i've a problem with cartodb
>>> ppahttps://launchpad.net/~cartodb/+archive/ubuntu/gis
>>>
>>> they are not build for armhf processors
>>>
>>> Is it possible to build that packages for arm Xenial version in a new
>> ppa?
>>>
>>> or do you have a ppa where that packages area available for ubuntu
>>> (raspberrypi version)?
>>>
>>> I've seen that all ubuntu gis packages are derived from your packages
>>> so i post also here the request.
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance
>>>
>>> Nico
>>>
>>
>> Nico,
>>
>> DebianGIS and UbuntuGIS do not maintain the Cartodb ppa. That is built
>> by and for Cartodb the company. I assume they use those packages to help
>> them deploy their service. You'll need to ask them.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alex
>>
> 

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Gis Packages for RPI

[Alex Mandel]

On 07/09/2016 10:21 AM, Nico Aliotta wrote:
> I'm trying to install cartodb on a raspberrypi3
> 
> and i've a problem with cartodb
> ppahttps://launchpad.net/~cartodb/+archive/ubuntu/gis
> 
> they are not build for armhf processors
> 
> Is it possible to build that packages for arm Xenial version in a new ppa?
> 
> or do you have a ppa where that packages area available for ubuntu
> (raspberrypi version)?
> 
> I've seen that all ubuntu gis packages are derived from your packages
> so i post also here the request.
> 
> Thanks in advance
> 
> Nico
> 

Nico,

DebianGIS and UbuntuGIS do not maintain the Cartodb ppa. That is built
by and for Cartodb the company. I assume they use those packages to help
them deploy their service. You'll need to ask them.

Thanks,
Alex
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Stable update

[Alex Mandel]

On 04/26/2016 11:21 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 6:24 PM, Worth Lutz <w...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> Thanks,
>> My error on our versions. It's 12 & 14. I typed without thinking.
>>
>> I understand dependencies sometimes keep updates from getting to older 
>> systems. I was hoping to jump to 16.04 but will have to wait on 
>> php-mapscript.
>>
>> Thanks for your work in making these packages available.
>>
>> Worth
>>
>>> On Apr 26, 2016, at 11:05 AM, Alex Mandel <tech_...@wildintellect.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Worth,
>>>
>>> 10.04 is past end of life from Ubuntu (2015) those people need to
>>> upgrade if they want any updates from us or Ubuntu.
>>>
>>> 12.04 only has 1 year left (2017), so it's unlikely to get anything
>>> except bugfix releases if possible (not always possible).
>>>
>>> Yes, this thread is about clarifying the policies.
> 
> Note that rather than policies, the major reason UbuntuGIS received
> little updates is that no-one found time to do so (eg I'm currently on
> a project where I have to use a windows desktop).
> If you or your customers rely on UbuntuGIS updates, please consider
> helping out packaging or contracting someone to do so. Debian GIS is
> in a good state now, so it is usually only a matter of backporting.
> I'm ready to help anyone who would like to contribute.
> 
> Kind Regards,
> Johan
> 


I think there are a few people willing to help (I always have been). The
roadblock generally has been not knowing the exact steps to take to make
the packaging work.

In this case I think there might be a clear path now. For things coming
from DebianGIS there should be some simple steps/commands that can be
written out and following. If it fails or the update is coming from some
other route then we file tickets and leave that to the current
professionals who have mastered the voodoo.

If someone can start up instructions I am willing to test and contribute
time to maintaining some packages.

Example, I would love to get QGIS 2.8.7 into stable.

Thanks,
Alex
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Stable update

[Alex Mandel]

On 04/25/2016 01:59 PM, Angelos Tzotsos wrote:
> On 04/25/2016 11:45 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 10:04 PM, Alex M 
>> wrote:
>>> Historically we haven't done a great job of keeping stable very
>>> relevant, but people running servers in production really ought to be
>>> using it and not unstable. Maybe a clearer policy on when things should
>>> move to stable needs to be made (it is ok for some packages to be the
>>> same version as unstable).
>> With quite DebianGIS quite up-to-date, Ubuntu already has rather
>> recent versions of most packages. I think stable becomes perhaps even
>> less relevant. For non-LTS releases I think we should not use it
>> (well, never say never). For LTS releases, I think the policy of
>> copying whatever gets on OSGeo live after the release is quite a good
>> policy. It gets a lot of testing.
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>> Johan
>> ___
>> UbuntuGIS mailing list
>> Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
>> http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki
> 
> +1 to rename testing to experimental. Actually I have started building
> everything based on gdal 2.0 there already.
> Also, +1 for a policy to copy everything from OSGeoLive after release.
> 
> Best,
> Angelos
> 

Only latest Ubuntu has recent versions of most packages.
12.04 and 14.04 actually have fairly old packages at this point but are
still in wide use and will be for another 1,3 years respectively.

UbuntuGIS stable is moot for Xenial but very important to Trusty. If
someone needs to stick to QGIS 2.8 and GDAL 1.11.x stable is where they
should be able to get that. In 6 months to a year stable will actually
become important for Xenial too since QGIS 2.14 will be the LTS and
should move to stable, with 2.16 and the upcoming 3.x series going to
unstable...

+1 to copying packages from osgeo-live, however we shouldn't let that
timetable keep us from updating unstable whenever new releases come out.

As I've said before in the past, if we can create simpler instructions
for all the easyish packages, there are more volunteers who would gladly
help keep packages flowing. I suppose we should make a list of who
generally upkeeps which packages.

Thanks,
Alex
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

[Ubuntu] Plan for QGIS and GRASS versions, etc...

[Alex Mandel]

Recent discussions/breaks in the QGIS/GRASS interactions via the QGIS
GRASS Plugin and QGIS Processing toolbox got me thinking we should
probably clarify the plan/policy for where to put various versions.


Seems based on our old  ppa naming:
Stable should get QGIS 2.8.x LTR updates
and GRASS 6.x

Unstable should get QGIS 2.10+, GRASS 7+ (QGIS GRASS Plugin known to not
work until at least QGIS 2.12)


Of course this assumes people use stable/unstable in the manner we
suggest. I actually don't know anyone who actually uses stable, since it
mostly seems to have much older stuff.

This also seems relevant to Mapserver, where 6.x  would move to stable
and 7.x could go in unstable. And GDAL 2 vs GDAL 1.x


A side variation I've heard  suggested is that we alias package names
and files so that a transition allows both versions to be installed
(would be awesome for postgis migrations). But I think that adds too
much complication on the Debian side.

Any other suggestions or ideas on how to handle this so end users  end
up with working versions. Current unstable leaves QGIS Processing
toolbox not working with any GRASS for some reason. Claims it can't find
GRASS (though GRASS launches fine directly).

Thanks,
Alex
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] How to install nightly build om trusty

[Alex Mandel]

Known bug I think, heavily discussed and patched for the last OSGeo Live
version. Might need to wait for QGIS 2.8.2 to include the fix.
SAGA should still work though the mentioned bug is specific to the GRASS
6-7 transition.

-Alex


On 04/22/2015 02:03 AM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
 Hi Johan,
 
 Can you verify your processing options (processing menu, options)
 Under providers, make sure grass 7 is active and for saga check that
 the box Use saga 2.0.8 syntax is not checked.
 
 Does this solve your problem?
 
 Kind Regards,
 Johan VdW
 
 On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Johan Nilsson joni8...@gmail.com wrote:
 Have problem to runing Saga or Grass 7 from Processing on unstable Ubuntugis
 ppa. The script appar as they should without ppa but the older versions lack
 some scripts i need. I had 6.4 version of Grass but everything stoped
 working with upgrade to grass 7, not just grass-plug-in but also in
 Processing.  May in help to reinstall all?  Other are it possible to upgrade
 to nightly-build, but can't find how i does it on trusty? Run ubuntu 14.04
 LTS (trusty)
 Johan N /Cheers


 ___
 UbuntuGIS mailing list
 Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
 http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki
 ___
 UbuntuGIS mailing list
 Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
 http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki
 

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] How to fix the unmet dependencies for grass-gui ?

[Alex Mandel]

On 03/23/2015 01:04 AM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
 On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 1:50 AM, Carlos Cerdán sig.up...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi Johan

 Well... I think there isn't error, QGIS doesn't works with GRASS 7.0,
 doesn't yet, so, in order to work with QGIS and his GRASS plugin, I think
 it's better to have the stable repository and leave ubuntugis for a while
 or... Am I mistaken?
 
 I noticed there was indeed an error in the grass package. I have
 removed it until it is fixed.
 
 Perhaps we should launch a poll to decide which version of grass we
 have in which archive? I assumed users would be happy with grass 7.
 
 Kind Regards,
 Johan


I thought it was standard practice to put the previous version in
-stable and the new version in -unstable.

So 6.x would stay in stable for a while and 7.x would be in unstable.
Note, QGIS Processing toolbox can use 7, it's only the unsupported QGIS
GRASS Plugin which is still 6.x only.

Wasn't there a way to allow install of both with grass7 prefix?

Thanks,
Alex

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] How to fix the unmet dependencies for grass-gui ?

[Alex Mandel]

Thanks for reporting. Likely an error on our part in the packaging. Will
get someone to look into it.

Thanks,
Alex

On 03/21/2015 04:05 AM, Luís de Sousa wrote:
 Dear all,
 
 I have the ubuntugis-unstable PPA registered in my sources.list
 (Ubuntu 14.04). Two days ago an automatic system update tried to
 install the new grass 7 meta-package, which failed due to unmet
 dependencies. Right now I have different versions of grass-core and
 grass-gui installed and grass fails to start.
 
 Apt reports the following:
 
 $ sudo apt-get build-dep grass-gui
 Reading package lists... Done
 Building dependency tree
 Reading state information... Done
 Picking 'grass' as source package instead of 'grass-gui'
 Note, selecting 'libtiff5-dev' instead of 'libtiff-dev'
 The following packages have unmet dependencies.
  libcairo2-dev : Depends: libcairo2 (= 1.13.0~20140204-0ubuntu1) but
 1.13.0~20140204-0ubuntu1.1 is to be installed
  Depends: libcairo-gobject2 (=
 1.13.0~20140204-0ubuntu1) but 1.13.0~20140204-0ubuntu1.1 is to be
 installed
  Depends: libfontconfig1-dev (= 2.2.95) but it is not
 going to be installed
  Depends: libglib2.0-dev but it is not going to be installed
  libproj-dev : Depends: libproj0 (= 4.8.0-2ubuntu2) but 4.8.0-4~saucy2
 is to be installed
 E: Build-dependencies for grass-gui could not be satisfied.
 
 I have tried the basic tricks in the book to fix these dependencies:
 install -f, autoclean, etc, to no avail. The following step would be
 to remove the PPA altogether, which obviously I can not do because I
 need grass.
 
 Could I get these dependencies from a different PPA? Otherwise, would
 there be any other way of getting grass running again? I do not mind
 continuing to use grass 6.4.
 
 Thank you,
 
 Luís
 ___
 UbuntuGIS mailing list
 Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
 http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki
 

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

[Ubuntu] QGIS-Mapserver rename

[Alex Mandel]

I support the rename of qgis-mapserver to qgis-server.
However is it possible with deb rules to select qgis-server for install
when uninstalling qgis-mapserver via upgrade? Perhaps an alias package
temporarily (transition package). So that people aren't left wondering
why their install stops working after the upgrade to 2.6.

Thanks,
Alex
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] [Qgis-developer] Grass, QGIS, and Ubuntu 14.04

[Alex Mandel]

On 08/13/2014 07:32 AM, Randal Hale wrote:
 I received an update yesterday and didn't pay attention. I updated the
 second machine today. It seems like I've seen this on the list early
 this week or last - but I've cleaned out email.
 
 The last ubuntu update breaks the QGIS Grass Plugin - the plugin wants
 grass 6.4.3 but grass has went to 6.4.4 at some point. Since I didn't
 pay great attention I'm not entirely sure if grass upgraded or the
 plugin downgraded. I'm not 100% sure it was this upgrade - but
 regardless this last one finished things breaking (if it started earlier).
 
 Randy
 

You did see some emails about this.

The plugin was removed, GRASS upgraded. When a new version of GRASS gets
added to the repo the main QGIS package has to be rebuilt for the
qgis-grass-plugin to match. That hasn't happened yet.

I'm not sure if there's an option with Launchpad to force rebuild of
QGIS whenever GRASS gets uploaded. Forwarding to the Ubuntugis group.

Thanks,
Alex
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Launchpad Clean Up

[Alex Mandel]

On 08/08/2014 08:07 AM, Jerome Villeneuve Larouche wrote:
 Hello,
 
 The launchpad repository is full so I have to clean up a bit. I will
 delete packages from Hardy(8.04) and Natty(11.04) from UbuntuGIS-Unstable.
 
 I will do it today so if anyone has anything against it, please tell me
 now.
 

That seems reasonable to me. Any idea how much space that will recover?

Alex
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Question on SAGA 2.1.1 and QGIS 2.2

[Alex Mandel]

Go into Processing-Options and Configuration
In the Providers-Saga section turn off 2.0.8 compatibility.
Should change to 252 algorithms.

Thanks,
Alex

On 03/23/2014 12:35 PM, Randal Hale wrote:
 Sorry - I'm still used to calling it sextante. I'm running 2.2 - when I
 run a tool from SAGA (it's showing 243 geoalgorithms)  I get:
 
 /Missing dependency.This algorithm cannot be run :-( /
 
 //
 
 /This algorithm requires SAGA to be run.Unfortunately, it seems that
 SAGA is not installed in your system, or it is not correctly configured
 to be used from QGIS/
 
 //
 
 /Click here
 http://docs.qgis.org/2.0/html/en/docs/user_manual/processing/3rdParty.html//to
 know more about how to install and configure SAGA to be used with QGIS/
 
 If I type saga_cmd I get:
 
 rjhale@galactica:/media/projects$ saga_cmd
 Error: no arguments for saga call
 Error: library
 
 63 loaded module libraries (631 modules):
 - shapes_transect
 - recreations_games
 - io_shapes_dxf
 - garden_3d_viewer
 - io_pgsql
 - sim_erosion
 - imagery_classification
 - pj_georeference
 - garden_webservices
 - ta_compound
 - ta_preprocessor
 - sim_cellular_automata
 - sim_hydrology
 - shapes_polygons
 - grid_calculus_bsl
 - grid_filter
 - io_odbc
 - imagery_tools
 - shapes_tools
 - climate_tools
 - imagery_rga
 - lectures_introduction
 - pj_proj4
 - contrib_a_perego
 - io_grid
 - imagery_svm
 - tin_tools
 - grid_tools
 - io_shapes
 - grid_visualisation
 - shapes_grid
 - imagery_segmentation
 - ta_hydrology
 - tin_viewer
 - ta_morphometry
 - io_table
 - ta_profiles
 - table_tools
 - grid_calculus
 - grid_spline
 - geostatistics_grid
 - geostatistics_regression
 - pointcloud_tools
 - ta_channels
 - docs_html
 - io_grid_grib2
 - table_calculus
 - shapes_points
 - sim_ecosystems_hugget
 - io_grid_image
 - grid_analysis
 - ta_lighting
 - ihacres
 - geostatistics_points
 - grid_gridding
 - docs_pdf
 - io_esri_e00
 - pointcloud_viewer
 - shapes_lines
 - geostatistics_kriging
 - recreations_fractals
 - io_gps
 - io_gdal
 
 type -h or --help for further information
 
 Randy
 
 
 
 
 -
 Randal Hale, GISP
 North River Geographic Systems, Inc
 http://www.northrivergeographic.com
 423.653.3611 rjh...@northrivergeographic.com
 twitter:rjhale
 http://about.me/rjhale
 
 On 03/23/2014 03:15 PM, Alex Mandel wrote:
 On 03/23/2014 10:27 AM, Randal Hale wrote:
 I have QGIS 2.2 installed and SAGA 2.1.1 (all from UbuntuGIS Unstable) -
 I can't get QGIS/sextante to find saga. I can run SAGA - I can run QGIS
 - I can't run SAGA Tools from Sextante. Anyway - Ubuntu 12.04 LTS.

 Thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated - I'm in the middle of
 writing a workshop and this was something I discovered. Hopefully it's
 something I've done on this end.

 Randy

 This is more of a QGIS question.

 1st, It's not called Sextante anymore, its called Processing and is
 included in QGIS. If you still have menu items called Sextante you have
 an old version of the plugin sitting around. Older versions are
 incompatible with SAGA 2.1+

 2nd, I see both on my system and Saga algorithms in my toolbox. Do you
 get an error when trying to run a tool or no tools listed? The
 difference matters.

 Thanks,
 Alex
 ___
 UbuntuGIS mailing list
 Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
 http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki
 
 
 
 
 ___
 UbuntuGIS mailing list
 Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
 http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki
 

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Question on 2.2 upgrade

[Alex Mandel]

Well if that's for a core feature then we need to change the control
file to install that dep.

Thanks,
Alex

On 02/22/2014 02:35 PM, Randal Hale wrote:
 So as it turns out.  I need to install the package libqt4-sql-sqlite
 http://hub.qgis.org/issues/8662
 
 I did that and it's up and running.
 
 Randy
 
 -
 Randal Hale, GISP
 North River Geographic Systems, Inc
 http://www.northrivergeographic.com
 423.653.3611 rjh...@northrivergeographic.com
 mailto:rjh...@northrivergeographic.com
 twitter:rjhale
 http://about.me/rjhale
 
 On 02/22/2014 04:35 PM, Alex Mandel wrote:
 On 02/22/2014 01:23 PM, Randal Hale wrote:
 So I was prompted with the upgrade to 2.2 .

 I've got one problem and I think it may be compile related. If I go to
 save a bookmark I'm getting a popup that reads:

 /Unable to open bookmarks database./

 //

 /Database: /home/rjhale/.qgis2//qgis.db/

 //

 /Driver: Driver not loaded/

 //

 /Database: Driver not loaded/


 If I crank up qgis from a terminal I get one more bit of useful info
 when trying to make a bookmark:
 /Warning: QSqlDatabase: QSQLITE driver not loaded//
 //Warning: QSqlDatabase: available drivers: QMYSQL3 QMYSQL QSPATIALITE/


 Thoughts or questions - am I missing something? Ubuntu 12.04 LTS is
 the OS.


 Thanks much,
 Randy


 Ask on the QGIS developer mailing list. I'm not sure this is a pure
 packaging issue. Though it looks like it might be a compile flag change.

 Thanks,
 Alex

 

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] A new QGIS 2.0

[Alex Mandel]

On 02/17/2014 01:24 PM, Randal Hale wrote:
 I was wondering if it would be possible (I know there's been a lot of
 talk about the repositories) to get a new(er) version of QGIS 2.0.
 There's a bug with spatialite (takes minutes to build a database) and
 you don't get that with the QGIS repos...but QGIS is compiled against
 gdal 1.7.3 and I would really like to keep 1.10. Sorry for asking - I
 should be trying to compile my own but that always seems to end not great.
 
 I know QGIS 2.2 is coming out shortly - but it would be pretty cool if
 this could be updated.
 
 Randy
 

Short answer is no, reason is that the ppa contains released versions of
QGIS. There is no official release greater than 2.0.1

When 2.2 comes out it will make it's way into unstable and likely 2.0.x
will get moved down to stable.

Now if you look at the qgis.org download page this is probably what you
want QGIS testing via ubuntugis, ...nightly builds that depend on
updated dependencies found in ubuntugis.
http://qgis.org/en/site/forusers/alldownloads.html#id2

Thanks,
Alex
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] A new QGIS 2.0

[Alex Mandel]

On 02/17/2014 02:40 PM, Randal Hale wrote:
 That works. Maybe the bug was with gdal 1.10 or something. It doesn't
 seem to be hanging with 1.7 - Anywho - I appreciate the info.
 
Hmm, if you used the qgis.org/ubuntugis-nightly it should be gdal 1.10
Unless you didn't clear out stuff first as the instructions indicate.

 No worries - I think 2.2 is pretty close...I think.
 
 I was always under the impression (and probably wrong) that 2.0.1 should
 be in stable and 2.2 should be in unstable. I think there was some
 chatter about that on the list at one point. BUT - today I've been wrong
 about most everything (ha).
 

Yes, once released 2.2 goes to unstable, 2.0.1 moves to stable, 1.8 gets
pushed out from anything 12.04 and newer (not sure about 10.04).

Thanks,
Alex

 Thanks,
 Randy
 
 -
 Randal Hale, GISP
 North River Geographic Systems, Inc
 http://www.northrivergeographic.com
 423.653.3611 rjh...@northrivergeographic.com
 mailto:rjh...@northrivergeographic.com
 twitter:rjhale
 http://about.me/rjhale
 
 On 02/17/2014 05:19 PM, Alex Mandel wrote:
 On 02/17/2014 01:24 PM, Randal Hale wrote:
 I was wondering if it would be possible (I know there's been a lot of
 talk about the repositories) to get a new(er) version of QGIS 2.0.
 There's a bug with spatialite (takes minutes to build a database) and
 you don't get that with the QGIS repos...but QGIS is compiled against
 gdal 1.7.3 and I would really like to keep 1.10. Sorry for asking - I
 should be trying to compile my own but that always seems to end not
 great.

 I know QGIS 2.2 is coming out shortly - but it would be pretty cool if
 this could be updated.

 Randy

 Short answer is no, reason is that the ppa contains released versions of
 QGIS. There is no official release greater than 2.0.1

 When 2.2 comes out it will make it's way into unstable and likely 2.0.x
 will get moved down to stable.

 Now if you look at the qgis.org download page this is probably what you
 want QGIS testing via ubuntugis, ...nightly builds that depend on
 updated dependencies found in ubuntugis.
 http://qgis.org/en/site/forusers/alldownloads.html#id2

 Thanks,
 Alex
 

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] A new QGIS 2.0

[Alex Mandel]

On 02/17/2014 03:02 PM, Randal Hale wrote:
 No - I'm only using the Ubuntugis/unstable ppa. I'll probably set up a
 VM sometime this week and run unstable to get a look at 2.2. I've been
 doing a lot of work with qgis/gdal and don't  want to run something that
 might snap with a nightly update.


 If you install QGIS from the QGIS.org repos it's built against gdal 1.7
 (unless I'm missing something). That's what made me wonder if there was
 some sort of update for 2.0.1 I was missing. Spatialite has been a bit
 odd with me - once you create a database it takes several several
 minutes to build it. That doesn't happen with QGIS built with gdal 1.7.
 It's not like it's not building or is corrupt when it finishes - it's
 just taking a lot longer than I think it should.

 It could just be me though - It doesn't sound like I'm missing anything.
 No worries.

Yes you are missing something.
There are 3 different qgis.org repos, 2 of which are nightly builds
The one you want is:
deb http://qgis.org/ubuntugis-nightly precise main
deb-src http://qgis.org/ubuntugis-nightly precise main
deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/ubuntugis/ubuntugis-unstable/ubuntu
precise main

This will get you 2.1.x (soon to be 2.2) with gdal 1.10

But yes you could break things since it's the nightly build, of course
if you get a working nightly build you can just lock it. FYI, if you're
making a new spatialite db you can just do that on the command line
before using it in qgis.

Enjoy,
Alex

 
 I'll play around with 2.2 some - maybe tonight.
 
 Randy
 
 
 -
 Randal Hale, GISP
 North River Geographic Systems, Inc
 http://www.northrivergeographic.com
 423.653.3611 rjh...@northrivergeographic.com
 mailto:rjh...@northrivergeographic.com
 twitter:rjhale
 http://about.me/rjhale
 
 On 02/17/2014 05:51 PM, Alex Mandel wrote:
 On 02/17/2014 02:40 PM, Randal Hale wrote:
 That works. Maybe the bug was with gdal 1.10 or something. It doesn't
 seem to be hanging with 1.7 - Anywho - I appreciate the info.

 Hmm, if you used the qgis.org/ubuntugis-nightly it should be gdal 1.10
 Unless you didn't clear out stuff first as the instructions indicate.

 No worries - I think 2.2 is pretty close...I think.

 I was always under the impression (and probably wrong) that 2.0.1 should
 be in stable and 2.2 should be in unstable. I think there was some
 chatter about that on the list at one point. BUT - today I've been wrong
 about most everything (ha).

 Yes, once released 2.2 goes to unstable, 2.0.1 moves to stable, 1.8 gets
 pushed out from anything 12.04 and newer (not sure about 10.04).

 Thanks,
 Alex

 Thanks,
 Randy

 -
 Randal Hale, GISP
 North River Geographic Systems, Inc
 http://www.northrivergeographic.com
 423.653.3611 rjh...@northrivergeographic.com
 mailto:rjh...@northrivergeographic.com
 twitter:rjhale
 http://about.me/rjhale

 On 02/17/2014 05:19 PM, Alex Mandel wrote:
 On 02/17/2014 01:24 PM, Randal Hale wrote:
 I was wondering if it would be possible (I know there's been a lot of
 talk about the repositories) to get a new(er) version of QGIS 2.0.
 There's a bug with spatialite (takes minutes to build a database) and
 you don't get that with the QGIS repos...but QGIS is compiled against
 gdal 1.7.3 and I would really like to keep 1.10. Sorry for asking - I
 should be trying to compile my own but that always seems to end not
 great.

 I know QGIS 2.2 is coming out shortly - but it would be pretty cool if
 this could be updated.

 Randy

 Short answer is no, reason is that the ppa contains released
 versions of
 QGIS. There is no official release greater than 2.0.1

 When 2.2 comes out it will make it's way into unstable and likely 2.0.x
 will get moved down to stable.

 Now if you look at the qgis.org download page this is probably what you
 want QGIS testing via ubuntugis, ...nightly builds that depend on
 updated dependencies found in ubuntugis.
 http://qgis.org/en/site/forusers/alldownloads.html#id2

 Thanks,
 Alex
 

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] MapServer 6.4 on Ubuntu 12.04

[Alex Mandel]

On 01/22/2014 11:11 PM, Dylan Rawlins wrote:
 Hi all,
 
 I submitted this under a different thread last week but I see that it
 pertains to the issues raised in this thread as well.
 
 I am running Ubuntu 12.04 (64 bit) and it automatically updated my
 apache to 2.4.6. That caused my PHP version to stop working correctly so
 I upgraded that to PHP 5.5.7.
 
 I managed to get PHP and apache working but the installation of
 php5-mapscript broke. I purged it and attempted to reinstall but got the
 following error message:
 
 The following packages have unmet dependencies:
 php5-mapscript : Depends: phpapi-20090626
 E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
 
 This seems to be a recurring problem with other php packages but I
 haven't been able to find any solutions yet. Is it possible that I will
 need to revert to using FGS Mapserver as at least it isn't subject to
 updates? Obviously not an ideal option as it is already very outdated
 but it would get me up and running again.
 
 
 Many thanks in advance
 
 Dylan


You can always opt out of a particular upgrade with apt pinning.
In the meantime you might want to ppa-purge or revert your php. I
understand a fix for the apache issue should be available soon.

This is part of the reason we have a stable repo. If you don't want to
be caught be upgrades your not expecting. You could also change your apt
preferences to only take security updates too.

Thanks,
Alex

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] UbuntuGIS PSC Nominations are Open

[Alex Mandel]

Absolutely. All volunteers are welcome, and it looks like you've already
found a good role - Tester. Note that some other things non programers
often help with is documentation and outreach.

The PSC is about designating specific people who make hard decisions
when they come up, though we generally will go with what the whole list
thinks is good.

Thanks,
Alex

On 01/18/2014 06:55 AM, Randal Hale wrote:
 Although I hate asking - is there room for a GIS Guy who doesn't program
 (well) to help with the PSC/OSgeo/anything?
 
 Randy guy who doesn't program well Hale
 
 -
 Randal Hale, GISP
 North River Geographic Systems, Inc
 http://www.northrivergeographic.com
 423.653.3611 rjh...@northrivergeographic.com
 mailto:rjh...@northrivergeographic.com
 twitter:rjhale
 http://about.me/rjhale
 
 On 01/17/2014 04:50 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
 On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 4:09 PM, Ivan Minčík ivan.min...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Johan, please add also yourself to the nomination list.

 Is anybody planning to visit OSGeo + QGIS sprint in Viena in March
 2014 ?
 Maybe we could work on final DebianGIS/UbuntuGIS proposal there .
 I am considering to go a few days (end of the week). Angelos Tzotsos
 is also going.

 Which reminds me that I'd also like to nominate him for the PSC.
 Especially for his hard work on osgeo-live dvd which includes a lot of
 packaging which should be done more aligned with debian/ubuntugis.

 Johan


 -- 
 Ivan Minčík
 ivan.min...@gmail.com  GPG: 0x79529A1E
 http://imincik.github.io/0x79529A1E.key
 ivan.min...@gista.sk GPG: 0xD714B02C
 http://imincik.github.io/0xD714B02C.key

 ___
 UbuntuGIS mailing list
 Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
 http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki
 
 ___
 UbuntuGIS mailing list
 Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
 http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] QGIS, Grass and GeoProcessing [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

[Alex Mandel]

On 11/21/2013 09:44 PM, Bruce Bannerman wrote:
 Hello,
 
 _Environment_
 
 Ubuntu: 12.04.03
 
 UbuntuGIS Repository: Unstable
 
 qgis: 2.0.1-Dufour
 
 saga: 2.0.8
 
 GDAL/OGR: 1.10.0
 
 Grass: 6.4.3
 
 
 
 I've been working with QGIS, looking at its potential as a GeoProcessing 
 environment.
 
 I'm particularly impressed with its Processing environment, especially with 
 its integration with Grass and SAGA.
 
 I have a query that may or may not be related to how QGIS is packaged.
 
 
 I'm trying to do some quite involved 'automated' vector data processing via 
 Grass algorithms that really require a topological data set.
 
 Unfortunately I don't really seem to have an option in the environment that 
 I'm using. The dialogs via QGIS that launch Grass algorithms typically 
 default to a shape file format. They do allow options, however these are 
 typically of similar style to a shape file and do not appear to be 
 topological in structure.
 
 Is there any way to work with a topological data format in this environment?
 
 Is this constrained by the options compiled with OGR?
 
 
 
 Bruce
 
 

Bruce,

I don't think this is packaging specific. I believe it's based on how
the Processing toolbox in QGIS is coded. I think you should talk to the
author Victor on the QGIS dev mailing list.

I actually have a similar gripe that SAGA algorithms convert everything
to shp before using, which means I can't use my big 4 GB+ postgis data
sets with it.

Thanks,
Alex

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] UbuntuGIS PSC Creation

[Alex Mandel]

On 11/13/2013 02:58 AM, Hamish wrote:
 Hi,
 
 Alex:
 and even making sure we have 1 person who is both DebianGIS and
 Ubuntugis for coordination.
 
 without getting too presumptuous, Frankie L. is an obvious person to
 approach, but failing that that a crossover person could be me, but
 tbh I'm not really sure how a PSC would actually benefit UbuntuGIS or
 OSGeo. A PSC is good for making strategic and political decisions, but
 95% of our issues are technical ones where the wider pool of
 developers participate in may the soundest idea win. The main
 strategic decision we have right now is the repo re-naming, which I
 think most of us are in fair agreement about anyway.
 
 I'm all for breathing life into the project in whatever way we can,
 but at the same time am concerned about adding new layers of
 bureaucracy which might morph into a time+energy sink/inefficiency,
 and avoiding the situation of too many chiefs  not enough braves.
 Another thing to be concerned with in small groups like ours is to
 avoid the appearance of a cabal, where new contributors don't feel
 part of the technical decision making group, and we desperately need
 those new contributors to be part of the technical decision making
 group.. On the other hand I fully accept Alan's concerns about his
 bus factor, in DebianGIS for a long time we've relied on Frankie
 in the same way.
 
 
 just some thoughts,
 Hamish
 

Agreed the PSC isn't about trying to exclude people from the
discussions. In fact I would suggest that even though a PSC is being
created there are no PSC only discussions and that just because a PSC
exists does not mean it has to have the only votes that count. We can
easily say the rule is we take the community decision that is 95-100% in
agreement (essentially consensus of participants).

There are only a few key things the PSC handles:
Adding/Approving Committers/Uploaders
Approving the community recommendations for repo naming/roadmap
Admin rights to the trac, launchpad and mailing list
Being the official contact people
Facilitating community discussions
Reminding people of their commitments (agreed maintainers), and
soliciting new maintainers when we need them (see item 1).


I'll note OSGeo Live has an informal PSC committee just by the nature of
who participates in the decisions: Hamish, Angelos, Cameron, Brian and me
And we already operate in a similar manner where technical issues are
openly discussed until we reach a conclusion everyone agrees to (or
doesn't outright object to).

I'm not too concerned about too many Chiefs in this particular project.
We mostly just want to improve the efficiency since right now packaging
uploading is completely on the fly which leads to some duplication of
effort or standing around and waiting when know one knows who's planning
to upload what or when.

I'd probably be the only Chief since I still haven't managed to
successfully upload what should be simple updates, everyone else here
seems to have a handle on how to get packages in.

Thanks,
Alex

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] UbuntuGIS ppa structure

[Alex Mandel]

On 11/11/2013 12:42 PM, Johan Van de Wauw wrote:
 On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 10:19 PM, Ivan Mincik ivan.min...@gmail.com wrote:
 

 I You think about it, my proposal to PPA structure is following:

 * ubuntugis-development - development versions of packages. Package version
 changes until they move to 'ubuntugis-staging'

 * ubuntugis-staging - staging versions which will be prepared to move at the
 time of each new ubuntu distribution release to 'ubuntugis-stable'

 * ubuntugis-stable - packages for all ubuntu distributions (LTS an non LTS)
 which will never change versions for a particular ubuntu distribution once
 released (only bugfixes available) - packages for each new distribution will
 be uploaded at the time of ubuntu distribution release
 Packages will be supported for each ubuntu distribution life time.

 ...
 Maintaining packages in 'ubuntugis-stable' for LTS distributions is
 long-term, responsible and boring task. This task I see as candidate for
 dedicated maintainer which could be financially supported by companies or
 organizations.
 Ideally these packages should not be in a ppa but in universe (ubuntu
 itself). If we keep in sync with debiangis the maintenance of these
 packages will be much easier and not duplicated
 

That's a great thought but a little of the mark. My servers are indeed
LTS but I use/need postgis 2.0 and gdal 1.10 which are not in universe
and if we're lucky might make Ubuntu 14.04

The ppa infrastructure works pretty well for keeping this going on new
enough versions without having to be all self compiled. Part of the
reason I don't use Redhat/Centos is they are almost always 3 years
behind on sensible packages and then keep that release like that for a
long time. ie even Postgis 1.5 on those platforms or Python 2.7 is a
royal pain sometimes.

 I think maintenance in the first place this is not a role for
 ubuntugis but for the project itself. I don't think it is good that
 someone outside the project keeps patches, ... Ideally a project
 should have maintenance releases as eg geoserver has. Usually no
 packaging changes are needed for maintenance releases, so the
 remaining job for debian/ubuntugis is not that hard.
 

Some members of Debian/Ubuntugis are the official packagers for some
projects for these distros. Yes, I agree usually little change to a
package should need to occur, but I've still not successfully repacked a
single point release for even simple projects (I tried GDAL a few times
on my way to learning to do it for QGIS). See more on this below.

 In fact if we have a package in universe, it may not be uncommon that
 security updates published by the projects are processed by motu's
 employed by canonical.
 In short, rather than duplicating work I think we should work more
 with ubuntu to make sure recent packages are added and supported.
 


A Java package is a bad example. New releases (1.8 to 1.9 to 1.10) of
GDAL sometimes requires GRASS, QGIS and Postgis to be rebuilt in order
for those new fixes/formats to come in. These types of changes are more
than Ubuntu would normally allow within regular updates as they are
mostly not security but feature updates (there may be some exceptions on
LTS now).

Yes, most of the packages are in universe, and if you look at the
description pages
http://packages.ubuntu.com/saucy/qgis
You'll see that Ubuntu Motu get them from DebianGIS. So part of the key
to this keeping DebianGIS up to date, which often times is harder than
keeping Ubuntu ppa's up to date. Or we can work with the Motu to use
Ubuntugis to get their updates.


 * ubuntugis-backports - backported packages for LTS distributions. Can be
 upgraded as time goes on for all distributions
 
 I think it is better not to have a seperate backports archive. I think
 the development/staging packages should just exist for every release
 we intend to support.
 It also seems more practical for an end-user. He/She adds the ppa once
 to get more recent versions of gis software than provided in universe.
 Now you ask him/her to add this ppa, and then at one point in the
 future to add the backports archive.
 Having an extra ppa also increases the number of scenarios we have to
 support: universe, universe+staging, universe+backports,
 universe+staging+backports. Instead of 1 you get 3 combinations next
 to universe. This becomes almost impossible to test every upload
 especially if you take into account different ubuntu releases.

I agree we probably don't want more ppa's just better naming and planning.

Here's how I think of it and examples of what would be in each:

Staging or Development aka Testing - Anything new that needs to be test
built or is not a final release
Newer or Backport or Latest Stable aka Unstable - Latest official
release from a project
Stable or Archive - Slightly older major release from project, moved
from Unstable into here before something new gets put in Unstable,
assuming it's newer than Ubuntu universe

Specific to 12.04 Precise ( some of the 

Re: [Ubuntu] QGIS and saga [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

[Alex Mandel]

On 11/10/2013 08:31 PM, Bruce Bannerman wrote:
 Hello,
 
 _Environment_
 
 Ubuntu: 12.04.03
 
 UbuntuGIS Repository: Unstable
 
 qgis: 2.0.1-Dufour
 
 saga: 2.0.8
 
 
 
 Is anyone using qgis and saga?
 
 I'm having a look at this combination as potentially part of a geoprocessing 
 workflow.
 
 When I try and view a (saga) command through qgis geoprocessing toolbox I get 
 the following error:
 
 Missing dependency.This algorithm cannot be run :-(
 This algorithm requires SAGA to be run.Unfortunately, it seems that SAGA is 
 not installed in your system, or it is not correctly configured to be used 
 from QGIS
 Click here to know more about how to install and configure SAGA to be used 
 with QGIS
 
 The specific algorithm was 'Contour lines from grid'.
 
 
 Saga 2.0.8 had already been installed with the command:
 
 aptitude install saga
 
 
 
 Any pointers appreciated.
 
 Bruce
 

I have used SAGA 2.0.7 with QGIS 1.8 from Ubuntugis. I think there is
something about processing in QGIS 2 being made to work with SAGA 2.10
but there's a packaging bug related to gdal that prevents us from
putting SAGA 2.10 into the ppa right now. Johan (from SAGA) knows more
about the issue.

Try the list archives for this list and the QGIS list ( do we archive
this list on Nabble?).

Thanks,
Alex
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] UbuntuGIS PSC Creation

[Alex Mandel]

On 11/06/2013 12:41 PM, Ivan Mincik wrote:
 Dear Alan, at first thank You for Your work (and also for work of others in
 this project). I am following UbuntuGIS for some time and I started to
 maintain my own PPA fork [1] some time ago, because I needed full control
 of packages. I am little bit involved in packaging. Here is my opinion:
 
 1. This project definitely needs a strong leader with experience.

Or PSC, I don't think there needs to be one person in charge if there's
a group that meets regularly to set the items below.

 2. UbuntuGIS lacks clear roadmap. Maybe it is loosing skilled hands just
 because they are not aware about fact they are needed. Preparing roadmap
 must by one of the most important tasks of project leader and PSC.
 
It doesn't seem like this would be hard to write up if a few of us met
online for a few minutes.

 3. Other very important task is clearly stated work flow in terms how to
 cooperate with Debian on regular basis.
 
Agreed, seems recent meetings might have started down this path.

 4. Still at least by my opinion, the PPA naming  stable, testing, unstable
 is very confusing for all newcomers which automatically expect the same
 behavior as in Debian. If this schema remains the same, or it will change
 to something other, it needs clearly documented workflow how packages
 migrates from testing, staging to production and how often and under which
 circumstances production packages are upgraded.
 
I agree this is confusing and maybe the roadmap helps clear it up.

 5. As in other voluntary projects, there is a lack of manpower. But on the
 other hand, there are no rules which new contributors or uploaders must
 meet. Also I do not see any list of free tasks for new people.
 
I'm not aware of anyone being a designated maintainer, so its more a
free for all once someone is granted access. Maybe we need to keep a
list of who is responsible for what, of course when one project needs
half the packages rebuilt that gets tricky to coordinate/wait.


 6. The last one is the question if there is some possibility to get some
 support from OSGeo [2] ?
 
What kind of support besides the mailing list, trac site, summer of code
spot?

Thanks,
Alex


 Even if these goals are unrealistic, I think having them is must for
 further grow of this project.
 
 1 - https://launchpad.net/~imincik/+archive/gis
 2 - http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/OSGeo_Binary_Distribution
 
 Thanks,
 
 Ivan Mincik
 
 
 On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Alan Boudreault 
 aboudrea...@mapgears.comwrote:
 
 Hi,

 As a few of you may already know, I've recently decided to quit my job at
 Mapgears (http://t.co/aIgMAFlf2h). I'm still working at Mapgears as a
 part-time job but my availability for ubuntugis is limited.

 For to goodness of UbuntuGIS, I would like to create a PSC (Project
 Steering Committee) for the project. There are many competent people on
 this list and a lot of ubuntu users. The PSC responsabilities would include:

 - setting the overall development road map
 - improve collaboration with DebianGIS
 - trying to bring more developers!
 - etc.

 I also think UbuntuGIS needs a new senior package maintainer. Jérome did a
 great job during the summer and will continue to work on the project with
 Mapgears.. but he is still at school for the moment.

 I'd like to hear what you think...

 Best Regards,
 Alan

 --
 Alan Boudreault
 http://www.mapgears.com/
 ___
 UbuntuGIS mailing list
 Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
 http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

 
 
 
 ___
 UbuntuGIS mailing list
 Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
 http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki
 

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] saucy ppa?

[Alex Mandel]

On 11/03/2013 08:48 AM, Matt Perry wrote:
 I was wondering, are there are plans to build the ubuntugis-unstable
 ppa for the Saucy Salamander/13.10 series?
 

There are always plans to upkeep with latest releases. Ubuntugis tends
to trail by a month or two a new release of Ubuntu. I don't think there
are currently enough people who know how to build/upload who use
pre-releases to push it closer to the release date.

Someone asks this every release, maybe an FAQ in an obvious place would
be good.

Thanks,
Alex
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Postgis from postgresql.org or ubuntugis?

[Alex Mandel]

Ah, so it does. Took me a while to find it since it's not listed on
their wiki or website specifically (I always knew the windows
enterprisedb had a way to get it)
http://apt.postgresql.org/pub/repos/apt/pool/main/p/postgis/

Poking around, one difference I can see, the version on
Ubuntugis-unstable will come with newer gdal and geos libraries.

I would still recommend you choose either postgresql repo or Ubuntugis
and not try to mix them. If only need it for LTS and you don't need any
other Geospatial applications like Mapserver, Qgis etc then the
Postgresql repo makes sense.

Thanks,
Alex

On 10/02/2013 10:19 PM, Uggla Henrik wrote:
 Thanks for your answer! You are wrong about Postgresql.org does not contain 
 Postgis though, it does.
 
 cheers
 Uggla
 
 
 Från: Alex Mandel [tech_...@wildintellect.com]
 Skickat: den 3 oktober 2013 00:13
 Till: Uggla Henrik; ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
 Ämne: Re: [Ubuntu] Postgis from postgresql.org or ubuntugis?
 
 On 10/02/2013 03:00 AM, Uggla Henrik wrote:
 Hi!

 Regarding different Postgis repositories:
 What are the main differences between posrgresql.org 
 (http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Apt) packages and those build by ubuntugis?

 cheers
 /Uggla
 
 
 Postgis in UbuntuGIS is built against stock Postgres from Ubuntu main
 repositories. It may not work if you mix the 2 repos.
 
 Also Postgresql.org does not contain Postgis only Postgres and appears
 to only contain LTS versions of Ubuntu.
 
 Postgres is the Database - From Ubuntu
 Postgis is an Extension - From UbuuntuGis
 
 Does that answer the question?
 
 Thanks,
 Alex
 

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

[Ubuntu] Fwd: Re: [Live-demo] [OSGeo] #1238: shp2pgsql-gui is missing

[Alex Mandel]

Anyone have feedback on what needs to happen to create a package with
the shp2pgsql-gui in it? I can see why the main postgis package doesn't
have it, since it could potentially add a gui to a headless system.

Thanks,
Alex

 Original Message 
Subject: Re: [Live-demo] [OSGeo] #1238: shp2pgsql-gui is missing
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 19:39:53 -
From: OSGeo trac_os...@osgeo.org
Reply-To: warmer...@pobox.com
To: undisclosed-recipients:;

#1238: shp2pgsql-gui is missing
-+--
 Reporter:  pramsey  |   Owner:  live-demo@…
 Type:  task |  Status:  new
 Priority:  normal   |   Milestone:  OSGeoLive7.5
Component:  LiveDVD  |Keywords:  postgis
-+--

Comment(by wildintellect):

 I will file this upstream with DebianGIS/UbuntuGIS since it comes from the
 postgis package. My suspicion is a way needs to be found to split it into
 a separate package so that postgis installed on a server does not pull gui
 dependencies.

-- 
Ticket URL: https://trac.osgeo.org/osgeo/ticket/1238#comment:1
OSGeo http://www.osgeo.org/
OSGeo committee and general foundation issue tracker.
___
Live-demo mailing list
live-d...@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/live-demo
http://live.osgeo.org
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Fwd: Re: [Live-demo] [OSGeo] #1238: shp2pgsql-gui is missing

[Alex Mandel]

Ok, Evan R pointed out the postgis-gui package which I hadn't seen
before. I went ahead an used that but noticed that it doesn't put a menu
item in or show in unity app searches. Now the question is where to file
that enhancement request. ie. A gui is nice but kind odd when you have
to know the CLI call to launch it.

Thanks,
Alex

On 09/12/2013 12:42 PM, Alex Mandel wrote:
 Anyone have feedback on what needs to happen to create a package with
 the shp2pgsql-gui in it? I can see why the main postgis package doesn't
 have it, since it could potentially add a gui to a headless system.
 
 Thanks,
 Alex
 
  Original Message 
 Subject: Re: [Live-demo] [OSGeo] #1238: shp2pgsql-gui is missing
 Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 19:39:53 -
 From: OSGeo trac_os...@osgeo.org
 Reply-To: warmer...@pobox.com
 To: undisclosed-recipients:;
 
 #1238: shp2pgsql-gui is missing
 -+--
  Reporter:  pramsey  |   Owner:  live-demo@…
  Type:  task |  Status:  new
  Priority:  normal   |   Milestone:  OSGeoLive7.5
 Component:  LiveDVD  |Keywords:  postgis
 -+--
 
 Comment(by wildintellect):
 
  I will file this upstream with DebianGIS/UbuntuGIS since it comes from the
  postgis package. My suspicion is a way needs to be found to split it into
  a separate package so that postgis installed on a server does not pull gui
  dependencies.
 

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Adding GeoNode to UbuntuGIS

[Alex Mandel]

On 07/15/2013 12:23 PM, Ariel Nunez wrote:
 Hello all,
 
 I have been working on packages for the upcoming GeoNode 2.0 [1] and in the
 process created a few packages that may be useful to others doing
 geospatial web applications in python (including django-geoexplorer,
 gsconfig - a python client library for geoserver's rest config,
 python-django 1.5 and others).
 
 What would be the process to suggest those packages[2] for inclusion in
 ubuntugis unstable?
 
 Best,
 Ariel.
 
 [1] http://geonode.org
 [2] https://launchpad.net/~geonode/+archive/unstable
 
 
 

You just did. Someone should probably check over the packages, do you
have a complete list of the ones you want us to use? Are any of them
built on dependencies that might have newer version in ubuntugis and if
so did you build against ubuntugis (I presume unstable).

Once that's worked out it's just a copy command to pull them over.
Perhaps Jerome can check this, since it's less work for him than hunting
down those packages and building himself?

Thanks,
Alex

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] [Live-demo] UbuntuGIS - Google Summer of Code - packaging Java based OSGeo applications

[Alex Mandel]

On 06/16/2013 04:21 PM, Hamish wrote:

Cameron:

I think the key thing we are looking for is an understanding of what
needs to be done to package java applications - something like a HOWTO
or similar, such that other projects can follow your footsteps.

Probably the best way to achieve this start packaging one of the
projects.


it's not really a question of how to do it at a basic level, it's more
a question of how to do it properly in light of the java traditions
of everyone self-bundling requirements with a few tweaks here and
there, which is in conflict with the packaging needs of sharing
libraries as much as possible. A side effect of Oracle tightening up
on the JAI license terms is that it forces the FOSS Java projects not
to use it, which (somewhat ironically) helps the packaging effort in
the long run.

from that perspective a first step of packaging java apps is to identify
the common jars and package those (from source, no blobs) first.


there are geo-java apps already in the main repositories (e.g. josm)
which could perhaps be used as a model?

see also this thread:
   http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.gis/month=20110201

there are other highly-relevant old threads but I'm stuggling with
the older pkg-grass@alioth DebianGIS archives right now since they
aren't indexed on Gmane yet..


regards,
Hamish



Wild guess, this might be in relation to the rumors that maven can 
directly lead to deb packaging in line with the normal build procedure 
of many Java apps. I don't know the details but it's been mentioned to 
me a few times. There was also some technical bit I didn't quite 
understand about how to push Java apps to Debian and Ubuntu build 
servers, since they didn't use to have the JAVA build chain on them but 
I think do in some way now.


Maybe step 1, is clarify the procedure.

I agree josm might be a good place to look.

Thanks,
Alex

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] UbuntuGIS - Google Summer of Code - packaging Java based OSGeo applications

[Alex Mandel]

+1

I agree that we should 1. make sure Debian (and therefore Ubuntu) are up 
to date on existing packages, 2. create instructions, workflows and 
tools to make it easier to maintain (and bring in new maintainers, 3. 
then move on to other ideas.


For those who haven't seen the plan
https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/project/google/gsoc2013/jlarouche/16001

Thanks,
Alex

On 06/11/2013 05:40 AM, Alan Boudreault wrote:

Hi Cameron,

I'm really for the java packaging effort. One of the difficulty I see is
that as its mentor.. I do not have any java packaging experience. This
is something Jérome will have to learn by himself and any collaboration
with other devs will be appreciated.

However, before doing any java packaging stuff, I'd like to follow to
the GSoC plan. When everything is update and that we have a working
debian stable repository... we are going to start this effort.

Is it ok with you?

Regards,
Alan

On 13-06-07 05:45 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:

Jerome, Alan,

We discussed ideas about Jerome's contribution toward OSGeo-Live in our
OSGeo-Live weekly meeting yesterday and we see this summer-of-code
project as an excellent opportunity to tackle one of the difficult
packaging issues we have had to date. Namely, the packaging of java
based applications.

Historically, java packaging into ubuntu has been difficult, largely due
to osgeo projects being dependant upon Sun Java, and Debian packaging
OpenJDK. We the last OSGeo-Live release, we successfully moved all
applications on OSGeoLive across to OpenJDK, so we should be in a good
position to start packaging these java based applications.

The other part of the problem, is that java projects usually don't have
much expertise in debian packaging (because they have not been doing
it), and debian packagers have not had much experience with java (again
because they have not been working with it).

What we really need is someone to work out how to bring these two
processes (and communities) together by doing to hard work of working
out what is required. Jerome's summer of code project provides an
excellent opportunity to make a big difference in this regard.

So I'd like to propose:
1. Jerome's primary focus should initially be on working out how to
package java applications into debian based systems (such as UbuntuGIS)
2. Start packaging the key java based applications. (I can introduce you
to key java developers and projects to ask questions of)
3. I suspect we should start with the Geotools library first, then
GeoServer (which is used by a number of other applications), then other
java based applications (depending on which projects step up to work
with Jerome)

Jerome, Alan,
How does that sound for an idea?


On 06/06/13 02:47, Alex Mandel wrote:

On 06/05/2013 09:22 AM, Alan Boudreault wrote:

Hi all,

As some of you may already know, we got a OSGeo Google Summer of Code
slot for UbuntuGIS. I'd like to introduce Jérome Vileneuve Larouche (a
student at The University of Québec at Chicoutimi) You may already have
seen his name on the list since he was working part time with Mapgears
during the last year. As the mentor of the project, I'm going to work
with Jérome to update and improve UbuntuGIS.

The main goals of the project is to:

- Train the student to be comfortable with debian/ubuntu packaging.
- Provide the UbuntuGIS-Stable Upgrade (biannual upgrade)
- Provide packages for Ubuntu Raring.
- Update UbuntuGIS unstable packages with all latest softwares
(Collaborate and contribute to DebianGIS)
- Collaborate with the user on the mailing list to be aware of the
known
issues and  provide new package and/or fixes
- Provide upstream patches to various osgeo projects.
- Create a new repository for debian stable (7.0) with all current
up-to-date packages
- Create more documentation for users and new contributors. (Howtos,
tutorial)
- Collaborate with the OSGeo LiveDVD project (more packaging for their
setup?)

We would be happy to hear comments/suggestions from the community to
improve UbuntGIS.

Best Regards,
Alan



Awesome. I look forward to more Howtos to help us train more people to
become maintainers of packages.

As a member of UbuntuGIS, and OSGeo Live I'll be happy to help
coordinate between the 2 projects.

Thanks,
Alex

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki








___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] UbuntuGIS - Google Summer of Code - packaging Java based OSGeo applications

[Alex Mandel]

Cameron,

Thats a tricky dependency issue, we are likely to opt to use 12.04 
instead of 13.04 because Ubuntugis is not up to date. But many people 
who try OSGeo-Live might then actually move to trying on 13.04. So in my 
mind making sure existing already packaged projects are up to date takes 
precedence over things that have never been deb packaged and might be 
hard to create deb packages for. Even prioritizing Java stuff first I 
have no expectations that even a fraction will be done in time for OSGeo 
Live 7. However focusing on Debian/Ubuntugis current packages I expect 
all of those will be ready in time for either 12.04 or 13.04.



So I disagree with you and agree with Alan on this plan. Having working 
QGIS, GRASS, Postgis etc that all work together correctly is more 
important to me than Java projects being apt-get installable.


Thanks,
Alex

On 06/11/2013 01:52 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:

Alan,
Re Java packaging, our biggest hurdle is there seems to be very few
people with java packaging experience, which is why it would be very
valuable to have someone research what is required, and set out a
roadmap for others to follow.

If we were to focus on java packaging for OSGeo-Live 7.0 (to be released
at foss4g 2013), then I'd suggest that java packaging should be focussed
on first, in order to give java projects time to help out. (I'm
expecting there to be quite a bit of research and discussion with
projects required). This would likely be at the expense of other
packaging efforts.

So while I'd love to see the java packaging issues worked out as the
primary goal, if we are to follow up with your schedule (which is a good
plan), I expect that java packaging will need to wait for a few more
releases. (Maybe a focus for a future GSoC project)

On 12/06/13 03:41, Alex Mandel wrote:

+1

I agree that we should 1. make sure Debian (and therefore Ubuntu) are
up to date on existing packages, 2. create instructions, workflows and
tools to make it easier to maintain (and bring in new maintainers, 3.
then move on to other ideas.

For those who haven't seen the plan
https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/project/google/gsoc2013/jlarouche/16001


Thanks,
Alex

On 06/11/2013 05:40 AM, Alan Boudreault wrote:

Hi Cameron,

I'm really for the java packaging effort. One of the difficulty I see is
that as its mentor.. I do not have any java packaging experience. This
is something Jérome will have to learn by himself and any collaboration
with other devs will be appreciated.

However, before doing any java packaging stuff, I'd like to follow to
the GSoC plan. When everything is update and that we have a working
debian stable repository... we are going to start this effort.

Is it ok with you?

Regards,
Alan

On 13-06-07 05:45 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote:

Jerome, Alan,

We discussed ideas about Jerome's contribution toward OSGeo-Live in our
OSGeo-Live weekly meeting yesterday and we see this summer-of-code
project as an excellent opportunity to tackle one of the difficult
packaging issues we have had to date. Namely, the packaging of java
based applications.

Historically, java packaging into ubuntu has been difficult, largely
due
to osgeo projects being dependant upon Sun Java, and Debian packaging
OpenJDK. We the last OSGeo-Live release, we successfully moved all
applications on OSGeoLive across to OpenJDK, so we should be in a good
position to start packaging these java based applications.

The other part of the problem, is that java projects usually don't have
much expertise in debian packaging (because they have not been doing
it), and debian packagers have not had much experience with java (again
because they have not been working with it).

What we really need is someone to work out how to bring these two
processes (and communities) together by doing to hard work of working
out what is required. Jerome's summer of code project provides an
excellent opportunity to make a big difference in this regard.

So I'd like to propose:
1. Jerome's primary focus should initially be on working out how to
package java applications into debian based systems (such as UbuntuGIS)
2. Start packaging the key java based applications. (I can introduce
you
to key java developers and projects to ask questions of)
3. I suspect we should start with the Geotools library first, then
GeoServer (which is used by a number of other applications), then other
java based applications (depending on which projects step up to work
with Jerome)

Jerome, Alan,
How does that sound for an idea?


On 06/06/13 02:47, Alex Mandel wrote:

On 06/05/2013 09:22 AM, Alan Boudreault wrote:

Hi all,

As some of you may already know, we got a OSGeo Google Summer of Code
slot for UbuntuGIS. I'd like to introduce Jérome Vileneuve
Larouche (a
student at The University of Québec at Chicoutimi) You may already
have
seen his name on the list since he was working part time with
Mapgears
during the last year. As the mentor of the project, I'm going to work
with Jérome

Re: [Ubuntu] UbuntuGIS - Google Summer of Code

[Alex Mandel]

On 06/05/2013 09:22 AM, Alan Boudreault wrote:

Hi all,

As some of you may already know, we got a OSGeo Google Summer of Code
slot for UbuntuGIS. I'd like to introduce Jérome Vileneuve Larouche (a
student at The University of Québec at Chicoutimi) You may already have
seen his name on the list since he was working part time with Mapgears
during the last year. As the mentor of the project, I'm going to work
with Jérome to update and improve UbuntuGIS.

The main goals of the project is to:

- Train the student to be comfortable with debian/ubuntu packaging.
- Provide the UbuntuGIS-Stable Upgrade (biannual upgrade)
- Provide packages for Ubuntu Raring.
- Update UbuntuGIS unstable packages with all latest softwares
(Collaborate and contribute to DebianGIS)
- Collaborate with the user on the mailing list to be aware of the known
issues and  provide new package and/or fixes
- Provide upstream patches to various osgeo projects.
- Create a new repository for debian stable (7.0) with all current
up-to-date packages
- Create more documentation for users and new contributors. (Howtos,
tutorial)
- Collaborate with the OSGeo LiveDVD project (more packaging for their
setup?)

We would be happy to hear comments/suggestions from the community to
improve UbuntGIS.

Best Regards,
Alan



Awesome. I look forward to more Howtos to help us train more people to 
become maintainers of packages.


As a member of UbuntuGIS, and OSGeo Live I'll be happy to help 
coordinate between the 2 projects.


Thanks,
Alex

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] [Qgis-developer] Could ubuntugis PPA be a recommended repository for QGIS 2.0 on Ubuntu ?

[Alex Mandel]

On 05/06/2013 07:40 AM, Ivan Mincik wrote:

On 05/06/2013 03:50 PM, Jürgen E. Fischer wrote:

Hi Ivan,

On Mon, 06. May 2013 at 14:58:55 +0200, Ivan Mincik wrote:

I wonder if ubuntugis PPA could be a recommended and only one repository
for QGIS 2.0 on Ubuntu instead of distribution packaged version and
package from 'http://qgis.org/debian'.


Recommended: ok.
Only: why?

I don't see the problem with a less intrusive version (ie. qgis on plain
ubuntu) and a more intrusive version (ie. qgis on ubuntugis).


Ubuntu distribution packages stick with 1.7 version which is obsolete.



That's a function of inheriting official packages from upstream Debian. 
Get newer versions into Debian and it trickles down.




Switching between the same versions from different repositories might be a
problem, but I suppose that doesn't happen often.


I think new users get confused about which one they really want and the 
reality is most actually want the Master builds because of features (but 
that's impractical because of stability). So we should make one of the 
options the Recommended. For me this has always been ubuntugis-unstable, 
primarily because the newer gdal builds support the formats people are 
trying to work with and some of the nastier bugs occur there (if you 
can't read/write your data everything else is pointless).




Maintaining both versions wasn't a big problem in the past, so I don't expect it
be come one in future.


Maybe a bug fixing could be easier when you deal for example with lesser
GDAL versions. Also when a time goes on distribution libraries goes
older and more version dependent workarounds must be provided (for
example GDAL 1.10 has better support for PostGIS raster and SpatiaLite)



The packages are only built on release, with the current dependencies at that
point - and only updated, when manually when necessary.  But that also applies
to both repositories.



PPA build could be less error prone than self made PBuilder. I am often
not sure if my pbuilder updated build deps when building packages
depending each other.





What needs to be done ?:



1. Fine tuned Debian 'control' file to prevent conflicting installation of
packages after upgrading from distribution packages to UbuntuGIS
(this is the case for example in GDAL)


0. Report those problems.


Yes, I am going to fix them in my PPA and send a patch. But I am not
sure where reports for PPAs should be submitted.


http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/

Unless it's an error in the DebianGIS version which we pull from their 
git repo. I need to go looking for where to report those besides mailing 
list and IRC.







2. More clearly described relation between ubuntugis-stable and
ubuntugis-unstable repositories (when the packages move from unstable to
stable ...)


Yes, that would be nice to know - I only upload to ubuntugis-unstable ;)




That is the correct place. Sadly the naming convention borrowed from 
Debian causes nothing but confusion.

Testing - where to put stuff when you're not sure if it will work.
Unstable - where you put stuff you want people to use.
Stable - where we move things to from Unstable when a newer version is 
staged to go into unstable, so that if you want to stick to the older 
one you can by switching to stable. Or if you need to get the older 
version or older deps for some reason (regressions).



What I am missing for PPAs is some kind of wiki where these informations
could be placed.



http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/

Thanks,
Alex
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] ubuntu configure options for gdal

[Alex Mandel]

On 04/17/2013 11:39 AM, Jason Paul Joines wrote:

 Original Message 
Subject: Re: ubuntu configure options for gdal
From: Alex Mandel
tech_dev-V1ui0Jp4Xm2ZwHVy+eqOOgC/g2k4z...@public.gmane.org
To: Jason Paul Joines jason-pte4joe1oxodnm+yrof...@public.gmane.org
CC: UbuntuGIS Users ubuntu-qjldd68f18nyqmayxoh...@public.gmane.org
Date: 2013.04.17.Wed.14:24:49

On 04/17/2013 11:07 AM, Jason Paul Joines wrote:

 Original Message 
Subject: Re: [Ubuntu] ubuntu configure options for gdal
From: Hamish hamish_b-/e1597as9lqavxtiumw...@public.gmane.org
To: Jason Paul Joines
jason-pte4joe1oxodnm+yrof...@public.gmane.org, Katie Urey
ksurey-re5jqeeqqe8avxtiumw...@public.gmane.org
CC: UbuntuGIS Users ubuntu-qjldd68f18nyqmayxoh...@public.gmane.org
Date: 2013.04.17.Wed.1:31:28

Hi,


Jason wrote:

I'm trying to rebuild gdal to get mrsid and filegdb support
in GRASS and QGIS on Kubuntu 12.04.2.

note you don't actually have to rebuild gdal for that, at
least mrsid can be installed as a plugin.
(same with many license-problematic format filters which can't
be built in by default)

perhaps you just need the libgdal1-dev package installed to
build plugins? (idealy)


I notice that libgdal-mrsid isn't prebuilt for Precise/12.04:
   https://launchpad.net/~ubuntugis/+archive/ppa/
   https://launchpad.net/~ubuntugis/+archive/ubuntugis-unstable

you can get the build rules and re-run debuild to make your
own package though. Once you get it set up and figured out it's
a very simple one liner to build your own packages.

https://launchpad.net/~ubuntugis/+archive/ubuntugis-unstable/+sourcepub/2354547/+listing-archive-extra




   I'm using the ubuntugis-unstable and ubuntugis-testing
repositories.  I'd like to build the gdal packages the
same way as the build in the repositories was built but
with mrsid and filegdb support as well.  How can I tell
what options were passed to configure to build the gdal
packages hosted there?

for rebuilding all of the gdal packages with some slight
modifications, what I'd do is get the DebianGIS packaging
rules and rebuild from there (perhaps with slight mod-
ifications as needed).

go to  http://wiki.debian.org/DebianGis  and scroll down to
the git repo.

you can use the instructions here, they'll work just as well
for GDAL as they do for rebuilding the GRASS packages:

http://trac.osgeo.org/grass/browser/grass/trunk/debian/README.debian

just swap the names around.


there are many ways to do it... that's just one!


good luck,
Hamish




Thanks for the information. I'll read up on all of these options and
give them a try.

However, from what I can tell, no one has every been able to get mrsid
and filegdb to work with Ubuntu 12.04. I've tried every guideline I
could find online without success. Mostly, the information is outdated.
There seem to be a lot of people in my situation who have tried
everything without success and can't find out if anyone has ever been
able to make it work.

At this point I'm afraid GIS is going to be the end of my 13 years of
exclusive open source use on my desktop.


Jason
===



So this method no longer works for Mrsid (I haven't tried since I
upgraded but it was working prior to 12.04)?
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki/TutorialMrSid
If I recall correctly gdal-build-mrsid is actually just a helper
script. So even if there isn't a package for the new ubuntu versions
you can grab the files from an older one and poke at it.


I'll contact Ragi and Frank about the Filegdb driver since one of them
is likely to have gotten it working.

Thanks,
Alex




 Nope, those directions no longer work.  The package
libgdal-mrsid-src is not available for 12.04.  Also, the available
lizardtech SDK is now MrSID_DSDK-8.5.0.3422-linux.x86-64.gcc44 which
seems to be a lot newer than the SDK referenced in that tutorial.


Jason
===



Yes, I know the package isn't available, but what I'm saying is that 
package is just a bash script, nothing else. If you look at the source 
from a previous version you can do the same steps by hand.


Also here is Ragi's Fabric script for filegdb, no idea if it works on 
12.04 (Ragi said it worked last year), but it can be deciphered into how 
to do it by hand.

https://gist.github.com/RBURHUM/2955440

Thanks,
Alex
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] UbuntuGIS membership

[Alex Mandel]

On 11/22/2012 05:13 AM, Manuel Grizonnet wrote:
 Hi all,
 
 I would like to request membership to UbuntuGIS team in Launchpad since I
 also maintain OTB packages that are already in the unstable project. I've
 recently built new versions packages in our testing PPA that I would like
 to copy in ubuntugis-unstable (
 https://launchpad.net/~otb/+archive/orfeotoolbox-staging-stable-ubuntugis/+packages
 ).
 
 My account is:
 https://launchpad.net/~manuel-grizonnethttps://launchpad.net/%7Egcpp-kalxas
 
 Thank you in advance.
 

Any objections? I think this would be a good idea.

I'm not an admin so someone else needs to add him.

Thanks,
Alex

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Package Updating - Need Help

[Alex Mandel]

So I got stuck -
GDAL requires freexl, and I can't seem to get debuild or
dpkg-buildpackge to work.

Log is attached.

I followed the same procedure as GDAL which I have succesfully pushed to
launchpad. But it won't build on launchpad because it's waiting for
freexl. It did work in my ppa initially because I used launchpad to copy
oneiric1 packages over, but those have the wrong package names.

Any ideas?

I'm getting a similar error on QGIS too, though I realize I need to
finish getting freexl, gdal, and possibly GRASS done 1st.

Thanks,
Alex



On 05/02/2012 04:46 PM, Alex Mandel wrote:
 The dependency order is the tricky one for sure. I've started trying to
 map that https://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki/BuildOrder
 
 New volunteers, here's a draft of steps to upgrade and existing package
 from oneiric to precise. If you want to give it a try, push to your own
 ppa, and after verifying it all works (and you can install the package
 from there) email the list and we can copy it over to the main repos.
 https://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki/PackageUpdates
 
 Edits, suggestions, corrections welcome...
 
 Right now I'm uploading gdal 1.9 for precise. After I test it will get
 pushed to unstable.
 
 I'm still working to figure out what else needs to be rebuilt for
 precise in order to get QGIS 1.7.4 in both stable and unstable.
 
 As and FYI proj 4.8, geos 3.3.x, postgis 2, qgis 1.8 will all be heading
 for ubuntugis-testing repo as they get packaged. That way we don't have
 to wait on any of those to get precise packages cloned now.
 
 Thanks,
 Alex
 
 On 04/23/2012 05:10 AM, Alan Boudreault wrote:
 Hi Alex,

 I would be glad to see a list of what need to be upgraded for precise
 (that means for all other release). Also, if some packages doesn't need
 upgrade, you could probably do the upload for precise. (Note that we
 have to respect the dependencies order)

 Thanks,
 Alan

 On 12-04-18 04:09 PM, Alex Mandel wrote:
 So I wanted to help get all the packages lined up for the Precise
 Pangolin release and was wondering if we have a simple checklist to
 follow for doing such things (eg. download file, change text in version,
 do a debuild and then a dput?). I'm talking about existing packages that
 are already working, though I assume some packages need dep changes (eg.
 geos).

 As a first step I attempted to copy packages from unstable to my
 personal ppa last night. Some of which worked, but clearly isn't right
 as the names say oneiric in them.
 https://launchpad.net/~wildintellect/+archive/wildintellect

 2nd topic is that I'd like to help clean up and straighten out the
 packages we've got. For example, move Postgis 1.5 to stable and get
 Postgis 2.0 into unstable, GDAL 1.8 to stable, GDAL 1.9 to unstable,
 etc...

 I'm hoping that by learning to do the simple stuff and creating a
 checklist.
 1. I can train more people to help do the mundane stuff
 2. By handling the more mundane free up you packaging masters to handle
 the trickier stuff.

 Thanks,
 Alex

 dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -d -us -uc -S -sa
dpkg-buildpackage: source package freexl
dpkg-buildpackage: source version 1.0.0b-1~precise1
dpkg-buildpackage: source changed by Alex Mandel t...@wildintellect.com
 dpkg-source --before-build freexl-1.0.0b
 fakeroot debian/rules clean
dh clean
   dh_testdir
   dh_auto_clean
   dh_clean
 dpkg-source -b freexl-1.0.0b
dpkg-source: info: using source format `3.0 (quilt)'
dpkg-source: info: building freexl using existing ./freexl_1.0.0b.orig.tar.gz
dpkg-source: warning: executable mode 0755 of 'configure' will not be 
represented in diff
dpkg-source: warning: executable mode 0755 of 'ltmain.sh' will not be 
represented in diff
dpkg-source: warning: executable mode 0755 of 'config.sub' will not be 
represented in diff
dpkg-source: warning: executable mode 0755 of 'install-sh' will not be 
represented in diff
dpkg-source: warning: executable mode 0755 of 'missing' will not be represented 
in diff
dpkg-source: warning: executable mode 0755 of 'depcomp' will not be represented 
in diff
dpkg-source: warning: executable mode 0755 of 'config.guess' will not be 
represented in diff
dpkg-source: warning: file freexl-1.0.0b/src/Makefile.am has no final newline 
(either original or modified version)
dpkg-source: warning: file freexl-1.0.0b/examples/examples.doxy has no final 
newline (either original or modified version)
dpkg-source: error: cannot represent change to freexl-1.0.0b/images/piazza.jpg: 
binary file contents changed
dpkg-source: error: add images/piazza.jpg in debian/source/include-binaries if 
you want to store the modified binary in the debian tarball
dpkg-source: error: cannot represent change to 
freexl-1.0.0b/tests/testdata/simple2003_4WB.xlw: binary file contents changed
dpkg-source: error: add tests/testdata/simple2003_4WB.xlw in 
debian/source/include-binaries if you want to store the modified binary in the 
debian tarball
dpkg-source: error: cannot represent change to 
freexl-1.0.0b/tests

[Ubuntu] Package Updating

[Alex Mandel]

So I wanted to help get all the packages lined up for the Precise 
Pangolin release and was wondering if we have a simple checklist to 
follow for doing such things (eg. download file, change text in version, 
do a debuild and then a dput?). I'm talking about existing packages that 
are already working, though I assume some packages need dep changes (eg. 
geos).


As a first step I attempted to copy packages from unstable to my 
personal ppa last night. Some of which worked, but clearly isn't right 
as the names say oneiric in them.

https://launchpad.net/~wildintellect/+archive/wildintellect

2nd topic is that I'd like to help clean up and straighten out the 
packages we've got. For example, move Postgis 1.5 to stable and get 
Postgis 2.0 into unstable, GDAL 1.8 to stable, GDAL 1.9 to unstable, etc...


I'm hoping that by learning to do the simple stuff and creating a checklist.
1. I can train more people to help do the mundane stuff
2. By handling the more mundane free up you packaging masters to handle 
the trickier stuff.


Thanks,
Alex


___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Re: [Qgis-developer] otb debs available

[Alex Mandel]

On 04/16/2012 04:19 AM, Julien Malik wrote:
 Hi,
 
 Le 16/04/2012 02:57, Alex Mandel a écrit :

 I believe the hold up previously was a libtiff linking issue in gdal
 which should be resolved now. I'll look into testing and copying from
 the otb ppa to the ubuntugis repo.
 
 When developing the OTB-Sextante-Qgis bridge during the HackFest, I
 was using qgis 1.7.4 from ubuntugis-unstable ppa, and otb from our own ppa.
 
 It works since we took a different approach than before and now Sextante
 is calling the OTB command line tools ('otb-bin' package).
 Previously we used the otb python bindings, so qgis and otb were loaded
 in the same process, and this is where we hit the issue with
 libtiff/libgeotiff. I confirm this issue is fixed with gdal 1.9, but
 gdal 1.9 is not available (yet ?) for all the distro.
 
 Now, it should just work.
 I believe it is safe to copy the otb packages into ubuntugis-unstable.
 It works ok for the otb inside sextante inside qgis project.
 
 Cheers,
 Julien
 

Julien,

Rather than guess which ones to copy, can you tell me your launchpad ID
so I can add you to the UbuntuGIS team and you can just upload future
releases there.

As for Paolo's question...Launchpad is actually the ideal place to keep
everything as it's more open for contribution and we can better rely on
the Debian packagers too. I'll be honest that I always have people
install from Ubuntu-GIS unless they want nightly builds because the
dependencies are usually updated faster there. I was actually
considering that we move the Ubuntu nightly builds there too so that we
lower the load on the qgis server (of course this might add complication
to Jurgen's work, which I'd like to avoid since he does such an awesome
job now).

Thanks,
Alex
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

[Ubuntu] Re: [Qgis-developer] otb debs available

[Alex Mandel]

On 04/15/2012 03:41 PM, Tim Sutton wrote:
 Hi
 
 On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Paolo Cavallini cavall...@faunalia.it 
 wrote:
 Hi all.
 I'm enjoying sextante and otb immensely, so I've packaged otb and
 uploaded to my repo:
 debhttp://int.faunalia.it/~paolo/debian testing/
 In case someone needs it. It is compiled on clean testing, with just
 gdal from experimental (1.9.0-1~exp2).
 Thanks a lot to the otb team for helping in packaging (especially
 Sebastien Dinot and Julien Malik).
 
 Are these available for Ubuntu GIS somewhere too?
 
 Thanks
 
 Tim
 

I believe the hold up previously was a libtiff linking issue in gdal
which should be resolved now. I'll look into testing and copying from
the otb ppa to the ubuntugis repo.

Thanks,
Alex


___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Re: [osgeo4w-dev] Binaries Packaging - A Strategic Investment

[Alex Mandel]

Don't forget the ELGIS people (Redhat et a.) and Angelos for OpenSuse.

Should we start a new mailing list for packaging - packag...@osgeo.org?
Wiki page for sure with links to each of the platforms packaging efforts.

I would be happy to do a packaging sprint, of course I've been trying to
learn packaging for Ubuntu for years now and think a couple of hours
with an expert would really bring people up to speed with at least being
able to keep packages up to date.

Anyone else going to be at FOSS4gNA?

Thanks,
Alex

On 03/24/2012 02:05 PM, Pirmin Kalberer wrote:
 Frank, Alain, Alex and others,
 
 I had a long discussion with Jürgen Fischer about packaging at the German 
 FOSSGIS conference this week. As you may know he's packaging QGIS for many 
 platforms inlcuding UbuntuGIS and OSGEO4W. Since QGIS has many dependencies, 
 he's also involved in packaging or updating dependent packages, escpecially 
 for OSGEO4W.
 In my opinion, the main packagers (Alan Boudreault/Vincent Foley on Ubuntu, 
 Francesco P. Lovergine on Debian, Jürgen Fischer and Tamas Szekeres on 
 WIndows 
 and William Kyngesburye on Mac come into my mind), should build a group and 
 improve communication.
 I also think that funding the work of these packagers would be a very good 
 investment for the FOSSGIS community.
 I like Alex' idea of training courses for new packagers very much. It would 
 be 
 great, if these expert packagers would get deputies and mentor them. Maybe 
 thats even a better long-term approach than starting to pay packaging work.
 So what a about a OSGeo Packaging group? OSGeo Live contributors could also 
 be involved and this could be a place for collecting information about 
 packaging, different platforms and events where packagers are present.
 
 Pirmin
 
 Am Donnerstag, 22. März 2012, 11.49:57 schrieb Alan Boudreault:
 Alex,

 I also like the idea of packaging sessions to bring more contributors in
 DebianGIS/UbuntuGIS, but I won't be in NA neither.

 Alan

 On 12-03-21 12:32 PM, Alex Mandel wrote:
 I spy a GSOC project idea: Packaging automation  a guide to train new
 packagers based on the automated system.
 Maybe with Frank and Alan as mentors?


 Should we also consider doing a packaging session at the sprint at
 Foss4gNA? Alan will you be there to teach packaging for debian/ubuntu?


 Thanks,
 Alex

 On 03/20/2012 11:35 PM, cavall...@faunalia.it wrote:
 Good point, agreed fully.
 Thanks for raising this out.
 Ready to help of necessary.

 ---
 http://faunalia.it/pc
 Sent from mobile, sorry for being short

 - Reply message -
 Da: Frank Warmerdamwarmer...@pobox.com
 A: OSGeo-Boardbo...@lists.osgeo.org
 Cc: Alan Boudreaultaboudrea...@mapgears.com, Brian
 Hamlinmapl...@light42.com,
 osgeo4w-devosgeo4w-...@lists.osgeo.org,ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
 Oggetto: [osgeo4w-dev] Binaries Packaging - A Strategic Investment
 Data: mer, mar 21, 2012 07:04


 Folks,

 I've mentioned this before, and I don't have anything surprising to
 add now. I just wanted to bump this topic.

 I believe that producing good quality integrated distributions of
 OSGeo
 binary software for a major user platforms is strategically important
 for OSGeo and would be worth an investment of moderate amounts of
 money to promote.

 For me two packaging efforts stick out, though I might be biased.

 1) OSGeo4W - I think the Windows environment is (still?) very
 important and OSGeo4W is a credible community effort to satisfy it
 that could benefit from more involvement, polish and a broader
 package set.

 2) Debian/Ubuntu/LiveDVD - I believe that Ubuntu is today the dominant
 desktop/server linux system and that the packaging efforts of the
 DebianGIS, UbuntuGIS and LiveDVD groups build on one another and
 provide high impact.

 If board members or community members see high impact and reasonably
 priced opportunities to extend these efforts with OSGeo money I hope
 they will come forward with them.  I'd also like to see us do more on
 the OSGeo web site, with case studies, etc to promote these package
 suites in a manner appropriate to their level of readiness.

 I also think the MacOS environment is very important but I'm not
 entirely clear on the best way of addressing that.  Good ideas on
 this aspect are also welcome.

 Best regards,



 ___
 osgeo4w-dev mailing list
 osgeo4w-...@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/osgeo4w-dev

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] gdal-1.8.0

[Alex Mandel]

On 04/26/2011 09:16 AM, Yevgen Antymyrov wrote:
 Guys,
 
 Do you plan to release GDAL-1.8.0 package?
 
 If you are busy, can I help? As I understand, some packages (e.g. qgis)
 need to be recompiled.
 

We could probably toss it into testing, though QGIS 1.7 release is
working its way towards packaging so it might only be a week or 2 before
we need rebuild that too.

Thanks,
Alex
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Minor Annoyance - Improper title

[Alex Mandel]

On 02/25/2011 11:41 PM, Hamish wrote:
 Alex wrote:
 PS: I tried to figure out how to file a bug in launchpad, odd that's
 there's no Add bug on the ubuntugis pages. Seems to be some quirk of
 how Launchpad is built though.
 
 You're probably looking at the /project/ page, while you need to file bugs
 against the /package/ page. It's highly confusing as they seem and look
 like the same thing, and when projects are made with the same name as the
 package instead of eg under the umbrella of the UbuntuGIS launchpad
 project.  this is mostly launchpad's fault I think.
 
 anyway, here you go:
  https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/qgis
  https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/qgis/+filebug
 
 
 Question 1: is the same thing titlebar thing in the Debian package or
 is it ubuntu specific? Official Lucid version, UbuntuGIS PPA, or QGIS
 project PPA?
 
 
 Hamish
 

I'm using Ubuntugis unstable PPA on Lucid. Though this name thing has
been there for several versions.

Just checked with someone on Debian Testing 1.6 titlebar is correct.
Don't know about regular Ubuntu packages since those aren't readily
available and are mostly 1.4.

Would filing a bug under qgis on launchpad bring it to the attention of
the ubuntugis group?

Thanks,
Alex


___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Launchpad download stats script

[Alex Mandel]

Ah that's an interesting site, but note how the data is collected.
This site publishes the statistics gathered from report send by users
of the popularity-contest package. This package sends the list of
packages installed and the access time of relevant files to the server
weekly. So it's an opt-in sub sample of the population.

There is some useful data to be had here though, since its essentially a
subsample of the population we might be able to test against the ppa
numbers to estimate how many people who download actually use qgis on
regular basis.

#name is the package name;
#inst is the number of people who installed this package;
#vote is the number of people who use this package regularly;
#old is the number of people who installed, but don't use this package
#regularly;
#recent is the number of people who upgraded this package recently;
#no-files is the number of people whose entry didn't contain enough
#information (atime and ctime were 0).
#rank nameinst  vote   old recent no-files
4147  qgis6979   803  5903   271 2

I read this as 12% of downloaders use on a regular basis, of course that
may actually be higher for the ppa, since it takes extra work to enable
the ppa. It's also unclear if the ppa is included in this sampling method.

Thanks,
Alex

On 12/11/2010 02:14 AM, johan.vandew...@gmail.com wrote:
 For ubuntu you could also check how many installations you have with
 popcon.
 popcon.ubuntu.com
 http://ubuntu-popcon.43-1.org/cgi-bin/graph.pl?name=qgis
 
 On Dec 11, 2010 3:35am, Alex Mandel tech_...@wildintellect.com wrote:
 Question came up today of how many QGIS users are there. Since the
 
 downloads happen from at least 4-5 major sites
 
 (kyngchaos,osgeo4w,launchpad,elgis,qgis.org) of which only one is
 
 directly a QGIS server the numbers are obviously short.
 
 
 
 Doing some digging there's a new api addition for launchpad that lets
 
 you get the data (soon to show up on the web interface too). The stats
 
 aren't quite there yet, pending full web log scans on launchpad's side
 
 but I wrote script this afternooon that is ready to start pulling the
 
 data as soon as it's there. Example csv output is up to, just with
 
 obviously wrong numbers.
 
 
 
 http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~wildintellect/+junk/launchpadapi-examples/files

 
 
 
 Inspiration was from this ticket
 
 https://bugs.launchpad.net/soyuz/+bug/139855
 
 
 
 Just thought this might be of use to others. QGIS team, Tim and I talked
 
 about working this python script into the Django site so we can list the
 
 number of Ubuntu downloads anytime we want and aggregate it with other
 
 stats we have.
 
 
 
 Thanks,
 
 Alex
 


___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

[Ubuntu] Launchpad download stats script

[Alex Mandel]

Question came up today of how many QGIS users are there. Since the
downloads happen from at least 4-5 major sites
(kyngchaos,osgeo4w,launchpad,elgis,qgis.org) of which only one is
directly a QGIS server the numbers are obviously short.

Doing some digging there's a new api addition for launchpad that lets
you get the data (soon to show up on the web interface too). The stats
aren't quite there yet, pending full web log scans on launchpad's side
but I wrote script this afternooon that is ready to start pulling the
data as soon as it's there. Example csv output is up to, just with
obviously wrong numbers.

http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~wildintellect/+junk/launchpadapi-examples/files

Inspiration was from this ticket
https://bugs.launchpad.net/soyuz/+bug/139855

Just thought this might be of use to others. QGIS team, Tim and I talked
about working this python script into the Django site so we can list the
number of Ubuntu downloads anytime we want and aggregate it with other
stats we have.

Thanks,
Alex
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

Re: [Ubuntu] Proposal - Cleaning up dependencies/repos

[Alex Mandel]

I'll test GeoDjango with Spatialite RC from the repo this weekend. I'm
mostly concerned about known bugs in the new features of spatialite and
underlying changes to sqlite itself since I'm working right now on
developing some potential sites for deployment on Ubuntu LTS.
I believe spatialite 2.4 requires sqlite3  3.7.x but LTS ships with
3.6.x series and there big differences in features between those (RTree,
WAL, how a spatial db is initialized), or at least that the author is
building against 3.7.x series.

As for gpsprune, yes my ppa has ubuntugis-unstable ppa as a dependency,
though I'm pretty sure that gpsprune as a simple java app isn't using
any of them. Looking at the dependency list appears to confirm that; jre
and a java metadata lib.
http://activityworkshop.net/software/prune/
Basic story it's a gps data filtering tool. The author expressed
interest in getting it onto the next OSGeo-Live disc which is why I
grabbed the maverick package from upstream and built it for Lucid.

Thanks,
Alex

On 11/24/2010 09:37 AM, Alan Boudreault wrote:
 I agree that RCs (perhaps excepting grass) should stay in unstable. However, 
 it would be nice to know if there are real issues in qgis/geodjango with 
 spatialite 2.4 rc2 before rebuilding packages in the stable ppa. Do you think 
 you could test that? I'm also uncertain if it's a good thing to downgrade the 
 spatialite package in the repo. But if there are issues, we'll do it. In the 
 future, we will avoid to put RCs in stable.
 
 About gpsprune, have added ubuntugis unstable PPA as dependency in your ppa? 
 If not, it would be useful to recompile your gpsprune package with the 
 ubuntugis dependencies and retest it. (btw, I have absolutely what gpsprune 
 is 
 and what its dependencies are)
 
 Thanks
 Alan
 
 On November 23, 2010 05:11:05 pm Alex Mandel wrote:
 So I ran into an interesting quagmire of dependencies.
 The moral of the story, I would like to propose that RC candidates of
 apps stay in unstable and not trickle into stable and maybe not even
 into testing (this could be a little looser).

 Particularly the issue I ran into is that spatialite 2.3.1 isn't in the
 repos at all, Lucid has 2.3.0 but it seems stuck on geos 3.1.0 which is
 making my QGIS crash. I would upgrade to spatialite 2.4 RC but I'm not
 sure that plays nice with GeoDjango yet.

 So under my idea
 Stable would have 2.3.0 or 2.3.1, QGIS 1.5(Could be upgraded after we
 know 1.6 is safe)
 Testing would also have 2.3.1, QGIS 1.6
 Unstable would have 2.4 RC x

 That way in testing there would be a nice reliable set of QGIS, gdal,
 spatialite etc that are known to be fairly good and unstable would have
 more cutting edge stuff. I realize maverick included spatialite 2.4RC
 and think that may have actually been a mistake since the author admits
 it's a bit buggy (not to say 2.3.x series doesn't have it's issues). But
 more importantly some underlying changes could cause issues for QGIS,
 GeoDjango etc. In summary having some slightly older version no longer
 available in Debian or Ubuntu might actually be a + to the everyday user
 if the distro jumps the gun on an app(in stable of course).

 This needs a little fine tuning obviously since GRASS tends to have
 really long release cycles and maybe could be summed as the testing
 ppa has the last known stable release.

 Any thoughts?

 Thanks,
 Alex

 PS: I'm more than willing to help package, just still new at it. Looks
 like gpsprune for Lucid worked and I would love to have that copied to
 ubuntugis.
 ___
 UbuntuGIS mailing list
 Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
 http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
 http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki
 

___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki

[Ubuntu] Proposal - Cleaning up dependencies/repos

[Alex Mandel]

So I ran into an interesting quagmire of dependencies.
The moral of the story, I would like to propose that RC candidates of
apps stay in unstable and not trickle into stable and maybe not even
into testing (this could be a little looser).

Particularly the issue I ran into is that spatialite 2.3.1 isn't in the
repos at all, Lucid has 2.3.0 but it seems stuck on geos 3.1.0 which is
making my QGIS crash. I would upgrade to spatialite 2.4 RC but I'm not
sure that plays nice with GeoDjango yet.

So under my idea
Stable would have 2.3.0 or 2.3.1, QGIS 1.5(Could be upgraded after we
know 1.6 is safe)
Testing would also have 2.3.1, QGIS 1.6
Unstable would have 2.4 RC x

That way in testing there would be a nice reliable set of QGIS, gdal,
spatialite etc that are known to be fairly good and unstable would have
more cutting edge stuff. I realize maverick included spatialite 2.4RC
and think that may have actually been a mistake since the author admits
it's a bit buggy (not to say 2.3.x series doesn't have it's issues). But
more importantly some underlying changes could cause issues for QGIS,
GeoDjango etc. In summary having some slightly older version no longer
available in Debian or Ubuntu might actually be a + to the everyday user
if the distro jumps the gun on an app(in stable of course).

This needs a little fine tuning obviously since GRASS tends to have
really long release cycles and maybe could be summed as the testing
ppa has the last known stable release.

Any thoughts?

Thanks,
Alex

PS: I'm more than willing to help package, just still new at it. Looks
like gpsprune for Lucid worked and I would love to have that copied to
ubuntugis.
___
UbuntuGIS mailing list
Ubuntu@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu
http://trac.osgeo.org/ubuntugis/wiki