[GRASS5] Platform for next generation UI
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
> 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.
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.
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.
More information about the grass-dev