[GRASS-dev] Some ideas about future GRASS development
Jarosław Jasiewicz
jarekj at amu.edu.pl
Wed Apr 28 04:20:11 EDT 2010
Hi all!
That rather radical ideas I present here are rather for future, at least
for GRASS 8, but I'd like present it now for long-term reflection.
Probably all notice that for over two years there is big increase in
add-on repository (including me). There are modules of different
quality: from fully GRASS toolsets, to shell or python scripts, from
actively developed tools to abandoned, from all-purpose tools to very
specialized etc. I also think that that activity will be grown due to
substitute shell script by python
Similar situation is in main GRASS branch: there are modules for all
like conversion tools, interpolation methods, georeferencing etc, and
very specialized modules for very limited group of users (like wild
fire), there are also some modules out of date.
I'm not enthusiastic about moving new modules into main branch. Almost
every module has different coding style and it will lasting in future
that GRASS would be difficult to maintain. On the other hand some people
complains that some interesting modules are only available as add-ons (I
assume for some reasons they cannot install it)
So my suggestion is to rearrange future GRASS form two layers (main
branch/add-on) into three layers architecture:
1) GRASS core layer: much limited limited than now, only GIS environment
and basic, all-puropse tools, slow changes, great stability
2) GRASS toolset layer: oficcial GRASS thematic tools and toolsets (like
terrain analysis, hydrological analysis, photo-interpretation, landscape
analysis etc,) every toolset with its maintainer, rapid development, new
ready to use tools after quality control may appear here, also some of
current main branch tool shall be moved to that layer
3) GRASS community layer: everything else like experimental, actively
development new tools, that what do not pass quality control, simple
scripts, etc....
What benefits:
for developers and contributors: much clear situation and better
publication path.
Toolset layer should be much more open for new tools than current GRASS
main branch
for users: faster access to new tools.
There is no doubt that new tools are faster developed (less risk) than
GRASS core
Binaries with toolsets could be maintained as separate
apt/urpmi/pacman/yum/exe etc packages, so it may appear in linux
repository separetly form GRASS core.
There is only loose ideas. Most of them are of course taken from R
(core/toolsets/rest of packages; separate core and package development)
but I think it is worth of some discuss ...
regards
Jarek
More information about the grass-dev
mailing list