[GRASS5] Platform for next generation UI

Gary Sherman sherman at mrcc.com
Mon Jan 2 18:40:25 EST 2006

On Jan 2, 2006, at 1:06 PM, Trevor Wiens wrote:
> Paolo,
> I don't consider the question rude at all. Good question however the
> answer is not simple. From what I gather there had been consideration
> about merging the projects some time ago about using QGIS as the GRASS
> front end, however QGIS developers were not interested.

This is incorrect. There was never any discussion about merging the  
two projects.
There may have been casual mention of it (I don't recall) but no  
talks took place.
I have always been interested in cooperation and collaboration with  
and view the integration via the current GRASS plugin as a huge asset  
to QGIS.

> From the GRASS
> side there are many people who don't want to see GRASS relegated to a
> library if the projects were not really merged but we simply  
> acquiesced.
> So what are we to do? Well, we can upgrade the current GUI and prepare
> the backend for a proper GUI as Glynn has suggested. Whatever we do,
> this will pretty much have to be done anyway to keep things working
> and things are developed. Once complete, we will either continue to
> enhance the existing GUI or do a complete rewrite in a different
> toolkit.
> There are limited resources but QGIS and GRASS are complimentary
> projects, not the same. A new GRASS GUI can demonstrate that  
> difference
> and help GRASS fulfil its role better.  Some of the changes need to
> facilitate that new GUI will help the QGIS projects support of GRASS.
> So this isn't just a bunch of duplicate effort.

You are correct,  the projects are not the same and address different  
QGIS continues to expand support for other data stores and as most of  
know, currently contains little in the way of analytical capability.  
The plugin
mechanism allow QGIS to be extended to other data stores and functional
areas (e.g. GPS support).

> Another thing to consider is that diversity is good. There are a huge
> number of duplicate GNOME and KDE apps out there, never mind GNOME and
> KDE themselves, but this healthy competition has produced better
> applications. Similarly, with QGIS out there, it provides good
> motivation to make the replacement GUI for GRASS more powerful and
> easier to use.

I don't view QGIS and GRASS as competitors per se but in the context of
your statement I get your point. I think the integration of GRASS in  
is a plus for both sides, regardless of how the next generation UI  
plays out.


Gary Sherman
sherman at mrcc.com

More information about the grass-dev mailing list