dylan.beaudette at gmail.com
Wed Feb 21 18:25:08 CET 2007
On Wednesday 21 February 2007 08:44, Michael Barton wrote:
> I'm all for improvements to the GRASS code and for adding new expertise to
> the development team. I also think that new open source GIS (and other)
> projects are a good thing. Ongoing evolution and diversity are hallmarks of
> the open source community.
> If there are to be major improvements or restructuring of the GRASS code,
> it will benefit more people if it takes place within the (very loose)
> structure of the GRASS community and existing code base. For example, Glynn
> Clements has put in an enormous amount of work to modernize and update code
> recently. He could really use some expert help with this.
> If you are starting a completely new GIS project from scratch, this is
> great. But giving it the name GRASS is misleading to potential users--even
> more so if it has no relationship with the existing project except the
> IMHO, I wish you would be willing to contribute your expertise to the
> existing project, which can always use new developers. However, if you
> prefer not to do this and would rather start a new project, I'd prefer that
> you named it something other than GRASS to avoid confusion.
> On 2/21/07 8:16 AM, "Radek Bartoň" <xbarto33 at stud.fit.vutbr.cz> wrote:
> > On Wednesday 21 of February 2007 15:19:55 Paolo Cavallini wrote:
> >> So I assume it is a fork, which is generally a Bad Thing.
> >> May I ask you why forking, and which development forces do you have to
> >> carry on what appears a daunting task?
> >> All the best.
> >> pc
> > If it is fork depends on what is definition of fork. Generally it should
> > be independent project which would provide modern programming framework
> > for analytical modules similar to that in current GRASS. So any user
> > which is used to work with GRASS command line would be familiar with new
> > system but inside it'will use completely new design oriented to OOP,
> > extensibility, parallelity and dynamic languages. Theoretically it should
> > be compatible with any GRASS's GUI developed over modules in the future.
> > IMHO a current state of core parts of GRASS is so unogranizes and
> > oldstyled that any progressive development is very difficult. That is why
> > I think that start from scratch and only take good ideas from GRASS is
> > now the best solution how to make a 21th century open-source GIS
> > realizable.
> > For next one year I'll be working on making its design and prototype
> > implementation as my diploma work so even if this project wouldn't keep
> > up it would be at least a research of GIS domain. I have spoken with a
> > few current GRASS developers and they invite my ideas so I wish it won't
> > happen.
> > Only support from comunity I miss for now are discussion of ideas and
> > needs of features but any kind of help or invention is welcomed.
> Michael Barton, Professor of Anthropology
> School of Human Evolution & Social Change
> Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
> Arizona State University
> phone: 480-965-6213
> fax: 480-965-7671
> www: http://www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton
I agree 100% with Michael's comments. Your support to the current project may
yield better results faster.
Soils and Biogeochemistry Graduate Group
University of California at Davis
More information about the grass-dev