[GRASS-dev] Future of external Processing providers in QGIS

Vaclav Petras wenzeslaus at gmail.com
Sat Feb 24 07:40:50 PST 2018

Thank you, Paolo, for the summary. It was great to be part of the meeting!

On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 9:26 AM, Paolo Cavallini <cavallini at faunalia.it>

> Hi all,
> meeting has just ended. I must say it was a very interesting and
> productive discussion. We are really grateful for the developers from
> GRASS, SAGA and OTB for their contributions to our discussion.
> I recap briefly here what I believe are the most important outcomes:
> * we'll keep SAGA and GRASS Processing providers
> * we'll try to update SAGA provider to the next LTR when this will be
> available
> * we invite OTB team to add their work to QGIS core, granting them write
> access if they wish
> * for OTB provider, considering that OTB binaries are not part of the
> installer on Windows, we suggest this approach: OTB provider checks
> whether OTB is installed, if not it suggests the user to install it, if
> the user does not the provider hides itself
> * While we have granted an exception to the ‘processing providers should
> not be in core’ for the short term, our longer term plan is to put in
> place mechanisms to ‘side load’ the dependencies (GRASS, OTB, SAGA).
> When this capability is implemented, we will mandate that all providers
> will be provided as plugins and then fetch these plugins on demand if an
> algorithm references them
> * we will not accept new providers, unless some very strict and
> exceptional conditions apply (TBD; e.g. new backend of high quality and
> general usage)
> * for future versions we will consider moving providers to the XML
> approach where appropriate, as it appears more maintainable, even at the
> expense of flexibility in interface tuning; GRASS is the next candidate,
> noting that this might require some modifications in GRASS core
> * as a first step in we ask anybody to test thoroughly the new SAGA
> provider by Alex Bruy
> https://github.com/alexbruy/processing-saga
> also a check from SAGA, GRASS, and OTB devs would be important, to check
> whether this approach is the preferred one from all sides.
> Please add if I missed something.
> Overall, I think we have now a brighter future for Processing, and as a
> consequence for QGIS, SAGA, GRASS and OTB altogether.
> * If you want to watch the complete discussion, please be patient; video
> is being uploaded.
> All the best, and thanks again.
> --
> Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
> QGIS & PostGIS courses: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html
> https://www.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=IT&q=qgis,arcgis
> _______________________________________________
> grass-dev mailing list
> grass-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-dev/attachments/20180224/da01da54/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the grass-dev mailing list