[geomoose-psc] Google Geocoder

Fri Jul 1 12:14:32 PDT 2016

What about d) figure out what happened to geocoder.us?

On Jul 1, 2016 14:07, "Eli Adam" <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul)
> <bob.basques at ci.stpaul.mn.us> wrote:
> > More discussion needed for anything other than “a”.
> >
> > We have some options we’ve been using locally that might work as a
> > replacement, but need to talk more about it first.  Hence my, release
> now,
> > and move to change later.
>
> If we have no plans for "c" to come about in the near- or mid- term,
> then "b" would be the immediate and mid-term option.  "a" to just
> delay "b" is not a good option.  If we're going with "b" in the
> mid-term, let's go with "b" now.
>
> Those are my thoughts, Eli
>
> >
> > bobb
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jul 1, 2016, at 11:24 AM, Dan Little <theduckylittle at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > In terms of level of effort:
> > a. This is already done in master.
> > b. This would be 30-45 minutes worth of work.
> > c. Probably an hour, maybe two hours with testing.
> >
> > I'm willing to do "b" if folks think that dropping the geocoder from
> > the demo is a viable move.
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us>
> wrote:
> >
> > Good point Bob, I think we need two discussions: What to do past
> > 2.9.1? and What to do for 2.9.1?
> >
> > For beyond 2.9.1, I favor c, especially if Mapzen or something else is
> > a viable option.  If there aren't viable options, then b sounds good
> > for long term.
> >
> > For 2.9.1, I think any options will work except we might want to
> > decide based on the long term.  i.e. if the long term route is b, we
> > should do that now for 2.9.1 too.
> >
> > Eli
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Basques, Bob (CI-StPaul)
> > <bob.basques at ci.stpaul.mn.us> wrote:
> >
> > My vote would be for “a”, with a Note about probable deprecation of
> service
> > in the demo.  Then figure out what the next version will look like.
> >
> > bobb
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jul 1, 2016, at 11:08 AM, Dan Little <theduckylittle at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Should we:
> > a. Deliver 2.9.1 with Google.
> > b. Deliver 2.9.1 without any 'enabled' Geocoder (comment out the entry
> > in the mapbook) and write a quick "How To Enable The Googs".
> > c. Deliver 2.9.1 with an alternative geocoder to replace geocoder.us
> > and leave the google code dormant as it was in 2.9.
> >
> > Aside:
> > I'm not sure which of a-c would necessitate switching to 2.10 but
> > these are all methods for addressing the same 'bug.'
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us>
> wrote:
> >
> > There is this,
> > https://mapzen.com/products/search/?lng=-124.01556&lat=44.66743&zoom=12
> > not certain on licensing but seems very unrestricted.
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 8:03 AM, Dan Little <theduckylittle at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > We could ship 2.9.1 with Google and do a next-step.  2.9.1, I think,
> > is basically ready for testing.
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:58 AM, James Klassen <klassen.js at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > It may be old school, but I didn't see any good alternatives mentioned
> > though.
> >
> > 1. Violate Google TOS
> >
> > 2. Cripple the Demo, but let people add it back.  Also, removes it from
> > regular testing.
> >
> > 3. Who needs geocoders anyway?  This might be OK for the parcel app users
> > because they probably already have better local data anyway.  But it
> doesn't
> > help anyone else.
> >
> > Also, this means the 2.9.0 on OSGeo Live should be fixed.
> >
> >
> > On Jul 1, 2016 09:49, "Dan Little" <theduckylittle at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > geocoder.us was useful but the momentum for geocoding TIGER files in
> > Berkeley databases is not considered particularly modern.
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:48 AM, James Klassen <klassen.js at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > I think an email saying we noticed it was down and offering to help
> > maintain
> > it might be worthwhile.
> >
> >
> > Yes, a nice courtesy.
> >
> >
> >
> > I guess my real question is if geocoder.us is still useful to the
> > community
> > or has the world moved on to something else (OSM)?  If it is useful to
> > us
> > and to others, we should look into helping maintain/support it.
> >
> >
> > On Jul 1, 2016 09:37, "Dan Little" <theduckylittle at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Schuyler Earl. Good luck.  It's like 12 projects ago for him.
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, James Klassen <klassen.js at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Do we know who was running geocoder.us?  Maybe we could get it fixed.
> >
> >
> > On Jul 1, 2016 05:03, "Dan Little" <theduckylittle at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hey Folks,
> >
> > geocoder.us appears to be defunct. The website doesn't load and
> > there
> > certainly does not appear to be any geocodes being returned.  This
> > was
> > our default geocoder.
> >
> > The other geocoder with which we have code is the Google Geocoder.
> > I'm fixing it up right now to work (it wasn't) and to also include
> > an
> > appropriate credit/disclaimer.  However, I'm a bit worried as we are
> > probably running afoul the Google TOS.  I see a few options:
> >
> > 1. Run with it. We're a very small fish in a very large pond.
> > 2. Do not include a Geocoder by default but provide instructions for
> > adding back in the Google geocoder (including setting an API key).
> > This runs ... "less" afoul the TOS depending on how you read them.
> >
> >
> > Running a demo of geocoding in GeoMoose seems fine as a demonstration.
> > We probably shouldn't distribute a working demo with an API key.
> > Right now, it would take work to run a different demo than what we
> > distribute as the demo.  So that makes a case for remove it from the
> > demo.
> >
> > With something like this, it seems providing directions and maybe an
> > example (but not working with an API key) is the correct path.  That
> > allows the user to evaluate the TOS and whether they are appropriate
> > for them.
> >
> >
> > 3. Remove all the geocoders.  They're all broken.  Folks may not
> > like
> > to see the code disappear.
> >
> > Long term (and I will file a ticket to this regard) we should
> > probably
> > write our own Geocoder instructions or write a crappy
> > DIY/off-the-shelf-libs geocoder that works with the default parcel
> > data.
> >
> >
> > Let's avoid writing geocoders, even lame parcel ones.
> >
> > Best regards, Eli
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > -Duck
> >
> > Reference tickets:
> > - https://github.com/geomoose/geomoose/issues/150
> > - https://github.com/geomoose/geomoose/issues/152
> > _______________________________________________
> > geomoose-psc mailing list
> > geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > geomoose-psc mailing list
> > geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > geomoose-psc mailing list
> > geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
> >
> >
> >
> > "I'm not interested in preserving the status quo; I want to overthrow
> it.”
> > -  Niccolo Machiavelli
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "I like nonsense; it wakes up the brain cells."
> > - Dr. Seuss
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> geomoose-psc mailing list
> geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geomoose-psc/attachments/20160701/f9b32466/attachment-0001.html>