[GRASS5] Platform for next generation UI

Trevor Wiens twiens at interbaun.com
Mon Jan 2 23:31:52 EST 2006

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:40:25 -0900
Gary Sherman <sherman at mrcc.com> wrote:

> 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.


I stand corrected. I didn't mean to imply any negativity about the QGIS
team, who have produced a product that I use regularly. From comments
made  I had understood there to have been some interest expressed from
individual GRASS developers and a lack of interest from QGIS
developers. Clearly I was wrong and should have phrased my earlier
e-mail more carefully to avoid giving the wrong impression and have
provided more qualification to indicate my lack of direct knowledge. I

> > 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  
> needs.
> QGIS continues to expand support for other data stores and as most of  
> you
> 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  
> discussion
> plays out.

Agreed. I simply grow tired of the occasional, "everyone should do the
same thing" arguments that resurface around GNOME and KDE, etc... I
don't see GRASS and QGIS as competing projects either, I was just
trying to make a point. 

Trevor Wiens 
twiens at interbaun.com

The significant problems that we face cannot be solved at the same 
level of thinking we were at when we created them. 
(Albert Einstein)

More information about the grass-dev mailing list