[geomoose-psc] Google Geocoder

Sat Jul 2 03:40:22 PDT 2016

Actually, you might want to check the zip and tarball, but local settings
might not make it into the builds from the demo anyway.

I can't remember the details off the top of my head though and don't have
time to look for a couple days.

On Jul 2, 2016 04:01, "Dan Little" <theduckylittle at gmail.com> wrote:

> If Jim makes progress on getting geocoder.us back up and running we
> can switch back to it.  For 2.9.1, I've added directions on how to get
> the Google Geocoder to work and have added code that requires that an
> API Key be added to local_settings.ini for it function.
>
> This does mean, however, the demo on Geomoose.org will not have a
> functioning geocoder.
>
> Thanks folks!
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:33 PM, James Klassen <klassen.js at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Fixing geocoder.us might be good overall though and if we help we aren't
> > grifting.
> >
> > The grifting argument applies to not using Google or others either which
> > leaves us with nothing.
> >
> >
> > On Jul 1, 2016 14:15, "Dan Little" <theduckylittle at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> A pile of effort for minimal gain to our application.
> >>
> >> If we want to release our stuff then. we can't be dependent on a service
> >> we were grifting.
> >>
> >> On Jul 1, 2016 21:14, "James Klassen" <klassen.js at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> 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/20160702/08c1e162/attachment-0001.html>